From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Subject: Re: pvops microcode support for AMD FAM >= 15 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 15:28:28 -0500 Message-ID: <20121219202828.GL15037@phenom.dumpdata.com> References: <1353936077.5830.30.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> <50B3805A02000078000AB1B8@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <1354711599.15296.191.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> <20121205214741.GA1150@phenom.dumpdata.com> <1354782871.28777.12.camel@dagon.hellion.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1354782871.28777.12.camel@dagon.hellion.org.uk> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Ian Campbell Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , debian-kernel , Jan Beulich , "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 08:34:31AM +0000, Ian Campbell wrote: > (trim quote please...) > On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 21:47 +0000, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > > Do you want to prep a patch that I can stick in my 'microcode' branch? > > .. That I will at some point try to upstream. > > You might want to look back at the archives when Jeremy first tried to > upstream this work, it was a vehement "No" and the resulting thread was > not pretty. > > Now that we have early loading via the hypervisor in 4.2 and Linux is > finally in the process of growing its own early microcode loading > solution I suspect the No would be even firmer. > > It is on xenbits if you want it anyway: > > git://xenbits.xen.org/people/ianc/linux-2.6.git debian/wheezy/microcode Thx. Pulled it in my stable/misc branch. > > About the only argument I can see for continuing to try upstreaming this > stuff is that in > http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/1583630 Fenghua says: > > Note, however, that Linux users have gotten used to being able > to install a microcode patch in the field without having a > reboot; we support that model too. > > i.e. this is an argument for keeping the previous scheme in parallel, > which I suppose is an argument for supporting the same under Xen (I > don't know if its a good one though. > > Ian. > > -- > Ian Campbell > > > All the existing 2.0.x kernels are to buggy for 2.1.x to be the > main goal. > -- Alan Cox >