[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131028152314.GN4314@pd.tnic>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 16:23:14 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@....eng.br>
Cc: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
tigran@...azian.fsnet.co.uk, x86@...nel.org, andi@...stfloor.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, microcode, Fix long microcode load time when
firmware file is missing [v2]
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 01:06:56PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> AMD can get away with a half-done implementation of negative caching
> (or an "optimised one" depending on your PoV :) ) because they have
> per-family firmware files, so even mixed-stepping systems will require
> only the same file. This is *not* true for Intel, which is really
> annoying.
Not per family but per-a-couple-of-families and starting with F15h we
did a separate container because of some obscure reason we had to dance
around at the time.
But per-family is enough because I hardly doubt any x86 vendor
would do mixed-setups of CPUs from different families. It is called
mixed-steppings for a reason: you can mix the same family and model CPUs
but with different steppings. And I think AMD had a K8 system which
sported that.
Mixing different families (and models for that matter) would be pretty
PITA and you're better off simply buying a bunch of identical CPUs :-)
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists