linux-kernel - Re: Detecting x86 LAPIC timer frequency from CPUID data

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1904181511150.3174@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date:   Thu, 18 Apr 2019 15:12:12 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Daniel Drake <drake@...lessm.com>
cc:     lenb@...nel.org, x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux@...lessm.com, rjw@...ysocki.net
Subject: Re: Detecting x86 LAPIC timer frequency from CPUID data

On Wed, 17 Apr 2019, Daniel Drake wrote:

> The CPUID.0x16 leaf provides "Bus (Reference) Frequency (in MHz)".
> 
> In the thread "No 8254 PIT & no HPET on new Intel N3350 platforms
> causes kernel panic during early boot" we are exploring ways to have
> the kernel avoid using the PIT/HPET IRQ0 timer in more cases, and
> Thomas Gleixner suggested that we could use this CPUID data to set
> lapic_timer_frequency, avoiding the need for calibrate_APIC_clock()
> to measure the APIC clock against the IRQ0 timer.
> 
> I'm thinking of the the following code change, however I get
> unexpected results on Intel i7-8565U (Whiskey Lake). When
> booting without this change, and with apic=notscdeadline (so that
> APIC clock gets calibrated and used), the bus speed is detected as
> 23MHz:
> 
>  ... lapic delta = 149994
>  ... PM-Timer delta = 357939
>  ... PM-Timer result ok
>  ..... delta 149994
>  ..... mult: 6442193
>  ..... calibration result: 23999
>  ..... CPU clock speed is 1991.0916 MHz.
>  ..... host bus clock speed is 23.0999 MHz.
> 
> However the CPUID.0x16 ECX reports a 100MHz bus speed on this device,
> so this code change would produce a significantly different calibration.
> 
> Am I doing anything obviously wrong?

It's probably just my fault sending you down the wrong path. What's the
content of CPUUD.0x15 on that box?

Thanks,

	tglx