From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
Cc: udovdh@xs4all.nl, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mb@bu3sch.de,
folkert@vanheusden.com
Subject: Re: enable dual rng on VIA C7
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 12:51:09 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071127125109.a2ef96f2.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071127185053.GA30057@redhat.com>
On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 13:50:53 -0500
Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2007 at 05:08:26PM +0100, Udo van den Heuvel wrote:
> > Dave Jones wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 06:02:39PM +0100, Udo van den Heuvel wrote:
> > >
> > > > I did not know we are already that far ;-)
> > > > I mean: can this patch be aplied without hurting C3/C7 CPU's with just
> > > > one RNG? Maybe an expert needs to test/answer?
> > > > Maybe some logic needs to be applied around the extra bit?
> > >
> > >>From the padlock spec..
> > >
> > > "SRC Bits[9:8] Noise source select (I): These bits control the two noise
> > > sources on the processor that input bits to the accumulation buffers.
> > > On Nehemiah processors prior to stepping 8, these bits are reserved
> > > and undefined. The default RESET state is both bits = 0."
> > >
> > > Something like this perhaps ?
> >
> > Yes, I think that's a big step in the right direction!
> >
> > But I am no expert and cannot really judge how necessary or correct the
> > implementation is w.r.t. the 'undefined' function bits for CPU's that
> > lack a certain feature.
>
> The checks at the end of the patch for the x86_mask/model ensure
> we only enable the 2nd noise source on CPUs documented to have it,
> so we should be safe.
>
> Andrew, want to throw that in the -mm pile for a while?
>
Did that, renamed to "via-rng: enable secondary noise source on CPUs where
it is present".
Has anyone tested it?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-11-27 20:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-11-11 18:49 enable dual rng on VIA C7 Udo van den Heuvel
2007-11-26 7:39 ` Andrew Morton
2007-11-26 17:02 ` Udo van den Heuvel
2007-11-26 18:58 ` Dave Jones
2007-11-27 16:08 ` Udo van den Heuvel
2007-11-27 18:50 ` Dave Jones
2007-11-27 19:01 ` Udo van den Heuvel
2007-11-27 20:51 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2007-12-01 16:51 ` Udo van den Heuvel
2008-01-25 19:03 ` Udo van den Heuvel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20071127125109.a2ef96f2.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=folkert@vanheusden.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mb@bu3sch.de \
--cc=udovdh@xs4all.nl \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.