Re: [PATCH] again: Re: Athlon kernel crash (i686 works)

Re: [PATCH] again: Re: Athlon kernel crash (i686 works)

[Bryan Mayland]

I'm happy with this patch too, as it stops my machine from crashing when switching to user-space.
I've run several LMbench tests against both 686-optimized and Athlon-optimized kernels.  The
results waver across multiple tests, one kernel winning some tests one time and losing the next,
but the values are all close.  I can post the results of any benchmarks 686 vs Athlon anyone wants
me to run if we can get this patch in soon!

Here's the dump of my LMbench runs, if anyone wants to oggle the numbers:
                 L M B E N C H  2 . 0   S U M M A R Y
                 ------------------------------------


Basic system parameters
----------------------------------------------------
Host                 OS Description              Mhz

--------- ------------- ----------------------- ----
Athlon-1  Linux 2.4.10-       i686-pc-linux-gnu 1333
Athlon-2  Linux 2.4.10-       i686-pc-linux-gnu 1333
i686-1    Linux 2.4.10-       i686-pc-linux-gnu 1333
i686-2    Linux 2.4.10-       i686-pc-linux-gnu 1333

Processor, Processes - times in microseconds - smaller is better
----------------------------------------------------------------
Host                 OS  Mhz null null      open selct sig  sig  fork exec sh
                             call  I/O stat clos TCP   inst hndl proc proc proc
--------- ------------- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----- ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
Athlon-1  Linux 2.4.10- 1333 0.21 0.29 4.93 5.74  17.1 0.60 1.90 142. 770. 8593
Athlon-2  Linux 2.4.10- 1333 0.21 0.29 5.24 5.98  28.8 0.60 1.90 152. 823. 8771
i686-1    Linux 2.4.10- 1333 0.21 0.29 4.61 5.47  29.5 0.60 1.91 141. 776. 8670
i686-2    Linux 2.4.10- 1333 0.20 0.29 5.02 5.86  32.7 0.60 1.88 156. 870. 8871

Context switching - times in microseconds - smaller is better
-------------------------------------------------------------
Host                 OS 2p/0K 2p/16K 2p/64K 8p/16K 8p/64K 16p/16K 16p/64K
                        ctxsw  ctxsw  ctxsw ctxsw  ctxsw   ctxsw   ctxsw
--------- ------------- ----- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------- -------
Athlon-1  Linux 2.4.10- 1.030 1.2900   11.6 3.5800  125.5    20.2   126.7
Athlon-2  Linux 2.4.10- 0.820 1.3800   11.7 3.6200  125.8    27.4   126.2
i686-1    Linux 2.4.10- 0.820 1.3100   11.6 3.8400  125.8    24.6   125.9
i686-2    Linux 2.4.10- 0.590 1.2700   11.7 3.9100  125.5    20.7   126.1

*Local* Communication latencies in microseconds - smaller is better
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Host                 OS 2p/0K  Pipe AF     UDP  RPC/   TCP  RPC/ TCP
                        ctxsw       UNIX         UDP         TCP conn
--------- ------------- ----- ----- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----
Athlon-1  Linux 2.4.10- 1.030 3.227 5.41 9.664  21.8  12.1  32.7 49.5
Athlon-2  Linux 2.4.10- 0.820 4.015 6.78  10.4  23.0  14.0  33.9 50.8
i686-1    Linux 2.4.10- 0.820 3.510 6.01 9.569  21.5  12.2  33.4 599K
i686-2    Linux 2.4.10- 0.590 4.153 6.75  10.1  23.0  13.2  34.1 18.M

File & VM system latencies in microseconds - smaller is better
--------------------------------------------------------------
Host                 OS   0K File      10K File      Mmap    Prot    Page
                        Create Delete Create Delete  Latency Fault   Fault
--------- ------------- ------ ------ ------ ------  ------- -----   -----
Athlon-1  Linux 2.4.10-   29.1   41.5  190.1   66.0    523.0 0.448 2.00000
Athlon-2  Linux 2.4.10-   30.9   43.9  199.3   64.2    537.0 0.429 2.00000
i686-1    Linux 2.4.10-   29.0   41.9  209.4   65.2    532.0 0.634 2.00000
i686-2    Linux 2.4.10-   31.0   44.1  187.1   64.5    610.0 0.436 2.00000

*Local* Communication bandwidths in MB/s - bigger is better
-----------------------------------------------------------
Host                OS  Pipe AF    TCP  File   Mmap  Bcopy  Bcopy  Mem   Mem
                             UNIX      reread reread (libc) (hand) read write
--------- ------------- ---- ---- ---- ------ ------ ------ ------ ---- -----
Athlon-1  Linux 2.4.10- 847. 685. 311.  332.4  501.3  176.2  206.2 471. 342.5
Athlon-2  Linux 2.4.10- 882. 586. 187.  331.6  510.2  177.6  207.1 484. 343.5
i686-1    Linux 2.4.10- 863. 586. 299.  320.0  510.2  176.3  206.6 472. 342.6
i686-2    Linux 2.4.10- 874. 318. 199.  319.6  520.2  177.7  206.8 486. 343.5

Memory latencies in nanoseconds - smaller is better
    (WARNING - may not be correct, check graphs)
---------------------------------------------------
Host                 OS   Mhz  L1 $   L2 $    Main mem    Guesses
--------- -------------  ---- ----- ------    --------    -------
Athlon-1  Linux 2.4.10-  1333 2.259   15.1  155.3
Athlon-2  Linux 2.4.10-  1333 2.259   15.1  155.4
i686-1    Linux 2.4.10-  1333 2.259   15.1  155.3
i686-2    Linux 2.4.10-  1333 2.259   15.1  155.3

No locking is needed ... why?

[Kirill Ratkin]

Hi.

Could somebody explain me this comment?:
/*
 * Incoming packets are placed on per-cpu queues so
that
 * no locking is needed.
 */

struct softnet_data
{
        int                     throttle;
        int                     cng_level;
        int                     avg_blog;
        struct sk_buff_head     input_pkt_queue;
        struct net_device       *output_queue;
        struct sk_buff          *completion_queue;
} __attribute__((__aligned__(SMP_CACHE_BYTES)));

I didn't understand why packets are placed so and why
locking isn't needed?


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
NEW from Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1

Re: No locking is needed ... why?

[BALBIR SINGH]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1741 bytes --]

Kirill Ratkin wrote:

>Hi.
>
>Could somebody explain me this comment?:
>/*
> * Incoming packets are placed on per-cpu queues so
>that
> * no locking is needed.
> */
>
>struct softnet_data
>{
>        int                     throttle;
>        int                     cng_level;
>        int                     avg_blog;
>        struct sk_buff_head     input_pkt_queue;
>        struct net_device       *output_queue;
>        struct sk_buff          *completion_queue;
>} __attribute__((__aligned__(SMP_CACHE_BYTES)));
>
>I didn't understand why packets are placed so and why
>locking isn't needed?
>

As I understand this, the only reason u lock is 

1) In an SMP or multiprocessor system, you suspect somebody else is running
   simultaneously with you, this can lead to two or more processors executing
   the same code simultaneously, this may lead to races.(which u do not want).
2) In a Multiprocessor or uniprocesor, data is shared among user processes in the kernel
   or
   between a user process in the kernel and an interrupt context
  (like an irq handler or a bottom half or a tasklet).

So if u have a situation where (2) does not hold and u have a multiprocessor system,
per CPU data need not be locked, since it is not visible/used by other processors.

Did I get it right?
Balbir

>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>NEW from Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
>http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1
>-
>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
>the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>




[-- Attachment #2: Wipro_Disclaimer.txt --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 853 bytes --]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Information transmitted by this E-MAIL is proprietary to Wipro and/or its Customers and
is intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is
addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or
exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended
recipient or it appears that this mail has been forwarded to you without
proper authority, you are notified that any use or dissemination of this
information in any manner is strictly prohibited. In such cases, please
notify us immediately at mailto:mailadmin@wipro.com and delete this mail
from your records.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: No locking is needed ... why?

[Rik van Riel]

On Tue, 9 Oct 2001, Kirill Ratkin wrote:

> Could somebody explain me this comment?:
> /*
>  * Incoming packets are placed on per-cpu queues so that
>  * no locking is needed.
>  */

> I didn't understand why packets are placed so and why
> locking isn't needed?

Each CPU has its own data structure here. This means no
other CPU will touch this queue (they have their own)
so there is nobody we could ever race against.

regards,

Rik
-- 
DMCA, SSSCA, W3C?  Who cares?  http://thefreeworld.net/  (volunteers needed)

http://www.surriel.com/		http://distro.conectiva.com/

Re: No locking is needed ... why?

[BALBIR SINGH]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 360 bytes --]

>
>
>
>Each CPU has its own data structure here. This means no
>other CPU will touch this queue (they have their own)
>so there is nobody we could ever race against.
>
We would still require locking or interrupt disabling if this data is used
from an interrupt context (due to re-enterency issues), wouldn't we Rik?

Regards,
Balbir

>
>
>regards,
>
>Rik
>




[-- Attachment #2: Wipro_Disclaimer.txt --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 853 bytes --]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Information transmitted by this E-MAIL is proprietary to Wipro and/or its Customers and
is intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is
addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or
exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended
recipient or it appears that this mail has been forwarded to you without
proper authority, you are notified that any use or dissemination of this
information in any manner is strictly prohibited. In such cases, please
notify us immediately at mailto:mailadmin@wipro.com and delete this mail
from your records.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: No locking is needed ... why?

[Rik van Riel]

On Tue, 9 Oct 2001, BALBIR SINGH wrote:

> >Each CPU has its own data structure here. This means no
> >other CPU will touch this queue (they have their own)
> >so there is nobody we could ever race against.
>
> We would still require locking or interrupt disabling if this data is used
> from an interrupt context (due to re-enterency issues), wouldn't we Rik?

I think this code is only run from interrupt context anyway.

regards,

Rik
-- 
DMCA, SSSCA, W3C?  Who cares?  http://thefreeworld.net/  (volunteers needed)

http://www.surriel.com/		http://distro.conectiva.com/

Re: [PATCH] again: Re: Athlon kernel crash (i686 works)

[Bill Davidsen]

On Tue, 9 Oct 2001, Bryan Mayland wrote:

> I'm happy with this patch too, as it stops my machine from crashing when switching to user-space.
> I've run several LMbench tests against both 686-optimized and Athlon-optimized kernels.  The
> results waver across multiple tests, one kernel winning some tests one time and losing the next,
> but the values are all close.  I can post the results of any benchmarks 686 vs Athlon anyone wants
> me to run if we can get this patch in soon!

That's what I see... the patch doesn't make things faster, it prevents the
system from failing due to user space code. If it was just a speed thing I
wouldn't feel strongly about getting it in production.

The other thing is that I don't buy "some people don't need it" when some
people can't run without it and no one yet has stated that it impaired the
function of their system.

Given that some systems are vulnerable to user code induced failuers
without the patch, and there are no reports that the patch causes problems
on any system, and it's optional in config anyway, why the resistance. The
"we know what you need" attitude belongs in that other o/s, not
Linux. Make it experimental, there are lots of other "use at your own
risk" options in config!

-- 
bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
 "If I were a diplomat, in the best case I'd go hungry.  In the worst
  case, people would die."
		-- Robert Lipe

Re: [PATCH] again: Re: Athlon kernel crash (i686 works)

[Dan Maas]

> I've run several LMbench tests against both 686-optimized
> and Athlon-optimized kernels.  The results waver across multiple
> tests, one kernel winning some tests one time and losing the next,
> but the values are all close.

The benefits of the kernel Athlon optimizations are higher memory bandwidth
for bulk copies/clears and less cache pollution. But LMbench isn't going to
show any difference, because its tests use generic x86 mem*() functions, not
Athlon-optimized SSE memory routines like in the Athlon kernel.

*Local* Communication bandwidths in MB/s - bigger is better
Host                OS  Pipe AF    TCP  File   Mmap  Bcopy  Bcopy  Mem   Mem
                             UNIX      reread reread (libc) (hand) read
write
--------- ------------- ---- ---- ---- ------ ------ ------ ------ ---- ----
-
Athlon-1  Linux 2.4.10- 847. 685. 311.  332.4  501.3  176.2  206.2 471.
342.5
Athlon-2  Linux 2.4.10- 882. 586. 187.  331.6  510.2  177.6  207.1 484.
343.5
i686-1    Linux 2.4.10- 863. 586. 299.  320.0  510.2  176.3  206.6 472.
342.6
i686-2    Linux 2.4.10- 874. 318. 199.  319.6  520.2  177.7  206.8 486.
343.5

It should be obvious that LMbench uses sub-optimal memory routines, since
the numbers for "Bcopy" and "Mem read/write" bandwidth are so much lower
than pipe and AF UNIX bandwidths! (the pipe/UNIX tests are basically
equivalent to Bcopy, plus extra user<->kernel transitions and context
switches).

The only cases where I'd expect the Athlon kernel to do better on LMbench
are essentially kernel memcpy() benchmarks - pipe and AF UNIX bandwidths.
I'm not sure if the kernel pipe and UNIX socket code actually uses
Athlon-optimized routines; in any case the small buffer sizes (eg 4KB for
pipes) could be hiding any performance gain.

Regards,
Dan

Re: [PATCH] again: Re: Athlon kernel crash (i686 works)

[VDA]

>> I've run several LMbench tests against both 686-optimized
>> and Athlon-optimized kernels.  The results waver across multiple
>> tests, one kernel winning some tests one time and losing the next,
>> but the values are all close.

DM> The benefits of the kernel Athlon optimizations are higher memory bandwidth
DM> for bulk copies/clears and less cache pollution. But LMbench isn't going to
DM> show any difference, because its tests use generic x86 mem*() functions, not
DM> Athlon-optimized SSE memory routines like in the Athlon kernel.

There are no SSE optimizations (yet).
There are prefetch/movntq tricks.
Optimized fast_clear_page() is 3x faster than normal one,
optimized fast_copy_page() is 1.5x faster than normal one.
(roughly, it depends on your mem and CPU MHz)

I can mail a test program to you if you are curious.
-- 
Best regards, VDA
mailto:VDA@port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua

Athlon kernel crash (i686 works)

[Marco Berizzi]

I updated my motherboard from ASUS A7V to ABIT KT7A (VIA Apollo KT133A
chipset). The kernel I had (2.4.10) started crashing on boot  usually
right after starting init. I tryed a i686 kernel and noticed it works
OK, so I recompiled my crashy kernel only switching the processor type
and it also worked. Changed it back to Athlon/K7/Duron and it starts
crashing.

I also search the mailing list. My mother board is KT7A series v1.3 with
bios revision 4T (I also try with 3N, same results). K7 at 1333MHz. BIOS
settings are default (except I have disabled all BIOS/video shadow).
After flash I also reset CMOS via hardware jumper.

Is there any solution to this (except compiling kernel for 6x86)?

TIA

[PATCH] again: Re: Athlon kernel crash (i686 works)

[VDA]

Oh no.

Anybody still insist that 'Athlon bug' patch is not to be
included into mainstream kernel?
If someone doesn't like it, feel free to make it a config
option (enabled by default!) and submit an updated patch.
My original patch against 2.4.9 is at the end.

Tuesday, October 09, 2001, 11:32:24 AM,
"Marco Berizzi" <pupilla@hotmail.com> wrote:
MB> I updated my motherboard from ASUS A7V to ABIT KT7A (VIA Apollo KT133A
MB> chipset). The kernel I had (2.4.10) started crashing on boot  usually
MB> right after starting init. I tryed a i686 kernel and noticed it works
MB> OK, so I recompiled my crashy kernel only switching the processor type
MB> and it also worked. Changed it back to Athlon/K7/Duron and it starts
MB> crashing.

MB> I also search the mailing list. My mother board is KT7A series v1.3 with
MB> bios revision 4T (I also try with 3N, same results). K7 at 1333MHz. BIOS
MB> settings are default (except I have disabled all BIOS/video shadow).
MB> After flash I also reset CMOS via hardware jumper.

MB> Is there any solution to this (except compiling kernel for 6x86)?
-- 
Best regards, VDA
mailto:VDA@port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua

--- pci-pc.c.orig       Sun Aug 12 15:54:07 2001
+++ pci-pc.c    Tue Sep 18 16:45:21 2001
@@ -948,6 +948,26 @@
        d->irq = 9;
 }
 
+/* Fixes some oopses on Athlon optimized
+ * fast_copy_page when it uses 'movntq's
+ * instead of 'movq's on Athlon/Duron optimized kernels. 
+ * Bit 7 at offset 0x55 seems to be responsible:
+ * > Device 0 Offset 55 - Debug (RW)
+ * >   Bits 7-0: Reserved (do not program). default = 0
+ * ABIT KT7A 3R BIOS: 0x89 (oopses)
+ * ABIT KT7A YH BIOS: 0x00 (works)
+ */
+static void __init pci_fixup_athlon_bug(struct pci_dev *d)
+{
+       u8 v;
+        pci_read_config_byte(d, 0x55, &v);
+        if(v & 0x80) {
+                printk(KERN_NOTICE "Stomping on Athlon bug.\n");
+                v &= 0x7f; /* clear bit 55.7 */
+                pci_write_config_byte(d, 0x55, v);
+        }
+}
+
 struct pci_fixup pcibios_fixups[] = {
        { PCI_FIXUP_HEADER,     PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL,   
PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_82451NX,    pci_fixup_i450nx },
        { PCI_FIXUP_HEADER,     PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL,   
PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_82454GX,    pci_fixup_i450gx },
@@ -961,6 +981,7 @@
 /* Our bus code shouldnt need this fixup any more. Delete once
verified */
        { PCI_FIXUP_HEADER,     PCI_VENDOR_ID_COMPAQ,  
PCI_DEVICE_ID_COMPAQ_6010,      pci_fixup_compaq },
 #endif 
+       { PCI_FIXUP_HEADER,     PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,     
PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_8363_0,       pci_fixup_athlon_bug },
        { PCI_FIXUP_HEADER,     PCI_VENDOR_ID_UMC,     
PCI_DEVICE_ID_UMC_UM8886BF,     pci_fixup_umc_ide },
        { PCI_FIXUP_HEADER,     PCI_VENDOR_ID_SI,      
PCI_DEVICE_ID_SI_5513,          pci_fixup_ide_trash },
        { PCI_FIXUP_HEADER,     PCI_ANY_ID,             PCI_ANY_ID,    
pci_fixup_ide_bases },

Re: [PATCH] again: Re: Athlon kernel crash (i686 works)

[Marco Berizzi]

ohhh thanks for the real time response. It's the first time I'm posting
to this mailing list.
Could I try to patch also 2.4.10 kernel? This patch will be included in
kernel 2.4.11?

----- Original Message -----
From: "VDA" <VDA@port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua>
To: "Marco Berizzi" <pupilla@hotmail.com>;
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2001 1:45 PM
Subject: [PATCH] again: Re: Athlon kernel crash (i686 works)


> Oh no.
>
> Anybody still insist that 'Athlon bug' patch is not to be
> included into mainstream kernel?
> If someone doesn't like it, feel free to make it a config
> option (enabled by default!) and submit an updated patch.
> My original patch against 2.4.9 is at the end.
>
> Tuesday, October 09, 2001, 11:32:24 AM,
> "Marco Berizzi" <pupilla@hotmail.com> wrote:
> MB> I updated my motherboard from ASUS A7V to ABIT KT7A (VIA Apollo
KT133A
> MB> chipset). The kernel I had (2.4.10) started crashing on boot
usually
> MB> right after starting init. I tryed a i686 kernel and noticed it
works
> MB> OK, so I recompiled my crashy kernel only switching the processor
type
> MB> and it also worked. Changed it back to Athlon/K7/Duron and it
starts
> MB> crashing.
>
> MB> I also search the mailing list. My mother board is KT7A series
v1.3 with
> MB> bios revision 4T (I also try with 3N, same results). K7 at
1333MHz. BIOS
> MB> settings are default (except I have disabled all BIOS/video
shadow).
> MB> After flash I also reset CMOS via hardware jumper.
>
> MB> Is there any solution to this (except compiling kernel for 6x86)?
> --
> Best regards, VDA
> mailto:VDA@port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua
>
> --- pci-pc.c.orig       Sun Aug 12 15:54:07 2001
> +++ pci-pc.c    Tue Sep 18 16:45:21 2001
> @@ -948,6 +948,26 @@
>         d->irq = 9;
>  }
>
> +/* Fixes some oopses on Athlon optimized
> + * fast_copy_page when it uses 'movntq's
> + * instead of 'movq's on Athlon/Duron optimized kernels.
> + * Bit 7 at offset 0x55 seems to be responsible:
> + * > Device 0 Offset 55 - Debug (RW)
> + * >   Bits 7-0: Reserved (do not program). default = 0
> + * ABIT KT7A 3R BIOS: 0x89 (oopses)
> + * ABIT KT7A YH BIOS: 0x00 (works)
> + */
> +static void __init pci_fixup_athlon_bug(struct pci_dev *d)
> +{
> +       u8 v;
> +        pci_read_config_byte(d, 0x55, &v);
> +        if(v & 0x80) {
> +                printk(KERN_NOTICE "Stomping on Athlon bug.\n");
> +                v &= 0x7f; /* clear bit 55.7 */
> +                pci_write_config_byte(d, 0x55, v);
> +        }
> +}
> +
>  struct pci_fixup pcibios_fixups[] = {
>         { PCI_FIXUP_HEADER,     PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL,
> PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_82451NX,    pci_fixup_i450nx },
>         { PCI_FIXUP_HEADER,     PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL,
> PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_82454GX,    pci_fixup_i450gx },
> @@ -961,6 +981,7 @@
>  /* Our bus code shouldnt need this fixup any more. Delete once
> verified */
>         { PCI_FIXUP_HEADER,     PCI_VENDOR_ID_COMPAQ,
> PCI_DEVICE_ID_COMPAQ_6010,      pci_fixup_compaq },
>  #endif
> +       { PCI_FIXUP_HEADER,     PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
> PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_8363_0,       pci_fixup_athlon_bug },
>         { PCI_FIXUP_HEADER,     PCI_VENDOR_ID_UMC,
> PCI_DEVICE_ID_UMC_UM8886BF,     pci_fixup_umc_ide },
>         { PCI_FIXUP_HEADER,     PCI_VENDOR_ID_SI,
> PCI_DEVICE_ID_SI_5513,          pci_fixup_ide_trash },
>         { PCI_FIXUP_HEADER,     PCI_ANY_ID,             PCI_ANY_ID,
> pci_fixup_ide_bases },
>
>
>

Re: [PATCH] again: Re: Athlon kernel crash (i686 works)

[Gergely Tamas]

Hi!

 > Could I try to patch also 2.4.10 kernel?

You can do this 'by hand'. 2.4.10 changed the structure a bit. But I sent
VDA a modified patch some time ago. Maybe just ask him.

 > This patch will be included in kernel 2.4.11?

I don't think so. :(

Honestly I'm not happy about this, but there had beed a large discussion
about it. There were some people which mobo worked right 'out of the box',
and they found that others should patch their kernels by hand to be able
to use their linux boxes. :(((

Gergely

ps: I use this patch too on an ABIT KT7A mobo with Duron 750

Re: [PATCH] again: Re: Athlon kernel crash (i686 works)

[Alejandro Conty]

Could my random kernel oopses be caused by that bug?

I have a VIA (ASUS A7V) cipset an K7 1000Mhz, and sometimes the kernel crash. 
I just updated to kernel 2.4.10, and the first problem is that I get a random
oops if I try to load analog.o with modprobe. I sent a report of this problem 
two days ago.

Could that patch solve my problem?

Re: [PATCH] again: Re: Athlon kernel crash (i686 works)

[Brian Gerst]

Alejandro Conty wrote:
> 
> Could my random kernel oopses be caused by that bug?
> 
> I have a VIA (ASUS A7V) cipset an K7 1000Mhz, and sometimes the kernel crash.
> I just updated to kernel 2.4.10, and the first problem is that I get a random
> oops if I try to load analog.o with modprobe. I sent a report of this problem
> two days ago.
> 
> Could that patch solve my problem?

The oops with the analog joystick driver is fixed in 2.4.11-preX.

--

				Brian Gerst

Re: [PATCH] again: Re: Athlon kernel crash (i686 works)

[Alejandro Conty]

> Hi!
> 
>  > Could my random kernel oopses be caused by that bug?
> 
> I'm not sure, but I think no. If you hit this bug, you're even not able to
> start Linux. In most - if not all - reported cases, the computers did not
> reach the shell. They oopsed e.g. at init or shortly after passing it.

Ok, so is not that bug, I get an oops only once in a week.

> 
>  > I have a VIA (ASUS A7V) cipset an K7 1000Mhz, and sometimes the
> 
> VIA KT133A ?

Yes. I just updated to 2.4.10, so I will wait a few days and see what happens. By now I haven't had any crash (but the analog.o one, which is already fixed).

Re: [PATCH] again: Re: Athlon kernel crash (i686 works)

[Gergely Tamas]

Hi!

 > Ok, so is not that bug, I get an oops only once in a week.
 >
 > >
 > >  > I have a VIA (ASUS A7V) cipset an K7 1000Mhz, and sometimes the
 > >
 > > VIA KT133A ?

Another thing. Which BIOS do you use ? Everything seems to be ok until
BIOS rel. 3C . Patch is only required for computers with BIOS rel. 3R and
later (as shown today :)) ...

Gergely

Re: [PATCH] again: Re: Athlon kernel crash (i686 works)

[Dan Hollis]

On Tue, 9 Oct 2001, Gergely Tamas wrote:
>  > Ok, so is not that bug, I get an oops only once in a week.
>  > >  > I have a VIA (ASUS A7V) cipset an K7 1000Mhz, and sometimes the
>  > > VIA KT133A ?
> Another thing. Which BIOS do you use ? Everything seems to be ok until
> BIOS rel. 3C . Patch is only required for computers with BIOS rel. 3R and
> later (as shown today :)) ...

ASUS A7V is KT133, not KT133A...

-Dan
-- 
[-] Omae no subete no kichi wa ore no mono da. [-]

Re: [PATCH] again: Re: Athlon kernel crash (i686 works)

[Luigi Genoni]

on 2.4.10

*** linux/arch/i386/kernel/pci-pc.c     Mon Sep 24 00:21:37 2001
--- 2.4.10/arch/i386/kernel/pci-pc.c    Sat Sep 29 12:03:13 2001
***************
*** 907,912 ****
--- 907,928 ----
        return rt;
  }

+ /* Fixes some oopses on fast_copy_page when it uses 'movntq's
+  * instead of 'movq's on Athlon/Duron optimized kernels.
+  * Bit 7 at offset 0x55 seems to be responsible.
+  * > Device 0 Offset 55 - Debug (RW)
+  * > 7-0 Reserved (do not program). default = 0
+  * > *** ABIT KT7A 3R BIOS: non-zero!? (oopses)
+  * > *** ABIT KT7A YH BIOS: zero. (works)
+  */
+ static void __init pci_fixup_athlon_bug(struct pci_dev *d)
+ {
+        u8 v;
+        printk("Trying to stomp on Athlon bug...\n");
+        pci_read_config_byte(d, 0x55, &v);
+        v &= 0x7f; /* clear bit 55.7 */
+        pci_write_config_byte(d, 0x55, v);
+ }

  int pcibios_set_irq_routing(struct pci_dev *dev, int pin, int irq)
  {
***************
*** 1172,1177 ****
--- 1188,1194 ----
        { PCI_FIXUP_HEADER,     PCI_ANY_ID,             PCI_ANY_ID,
pci_fixup_ide_bases },
        { PCI_FIXUP_HEADER,     PCI_VENDOR_ID_SI,
PCI_DEVICE_ID_SI_5597, pci_fixup_latency },
        { PCI_FIXUP_HEADER,     PCI_VENDOR_ID_SI,
PCI_DEVICE_ID_SI_5598, pci_fixup_latency },
+       { PCI_FIXUP_HEADER,     PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
+PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_8363_0, pci_fixup_athlon_bug },
        { PCI_FIXUP_HEADER,     PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL,
PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_82371AB_3,  pci_fixup_piix4_acpi },
        { 0 }
  };



On Tue, 9 Oct 2001, Gergely Tamas wrote:

> Hi!
>
>  > Could I try to patch also 2.4.10 kernel?
>
> You can do this 'by hand'. 2.4.10 changed the structure a bit. But I sent
> VDA a modified patch some time ago. Maybe just ask him.
>
>  > This patch will be included in kernel 2.4.11?
>
> I don't think so. :(
>
> Honestly I'm not happy about this, but there had beed a large discussion
> about it. There were some people which mobo worked right 'out of the box',
> and they found that others should patch their kernels by hand to be able
> to use their linux boxes. :(((
>
> Gergely
>
> ps: I use this patch too on an ABIT KT7A mobo with Duron 750
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>

Re: [PATCH] again: Re: Athlon kernel crash (i686 works)

[Fabio Coatti]

Il 13:45, martedì 9 ottobre 2001, VDA ha scritto:

> Anybody still insist that 'Athlon bug' patch is not to be
> included into mainstream kernel?
> If someone doesn't like it, feel free to make it a config
> option (enabled by default!) and submit an updated patch.
> My original patch against 2.4.9 is at the end.
>
> Tuesday, October 09, 2001, 11:32:24 AM,
> "Marco Berizzi" <pupilla@hotmail.com> wrote:
> MB> I updated my motherboard from ASUS A7V to ABIT KT7A (VIA Apollo KT133A
> MB> chipset). The kernel I had (2.4.10) started crashing on boot  usually
> MB> right after starting init. I tryed a i686 kernel and noticed it works
> MB> OK, so I recompiled my crashy kernel only switching the processor type
> MB> and it also worked. Changed it back to Athlon/K7/Duron and it starts
> MB> crashing.

Same problem here (oops at boot, athlon 1.2GHz, kernels 2.4.9 ->10, athlon 
optimization. All goes right if I set i686 processor) but the patch didn't 
work. I have a GA-7VMM / VIA KLE 133 AGPset Motherboard. The kernel still 
oopses , it only changes color:) (white on black without patch, green on 
black with patch applied.)
I will be happy to test any new patch, if this can help.
--
Fabio Coatti
Ferrara Linux User Group

Re: [PATCH] again: Re: Athlon kernel crash (i686 works)

[Dan Hollis]

On Tue, 9 Oct 2001, VDA wrote:
> Anybody still insist that 'Athlon bug' patch is not to be
> included into mainstream kernel?
> If someone doesn't like it, feel free to make it a config
> option (enabled by default!) and submit an updated patch.
> My original patch against 2.4.9 is at the end.

It should perhaps go in alan's pre-kernels, but it needs wide testing.

Want should make sure it doesn't break systems which are otherwise fine
without it.

And we still don't have any explanation from VIA what this mysterious bit
is supposed to do.

-Dan
-- 
[-] Omae no subete no kichi wa ore no mono da. [-]

Re: [PATCH] again: Re: Athlon kernel crash (i686 works)

[Luigi Genoni]

Yes, this patch shlud be included as configuration option,
(also because of the long nights spended discusing this topic and
seeing  this thousands of lspci-vvvxxx output :) ), but not enabled
byu default and with a VERY VERY clear help.

Luigi

On Tue, 9 Oct 2001, VDA wrote:

> Oh no.
>
> Anybody still insist that 'Athlon bug' patch is not to be
> included into mainstream kernel?
> If someone doesn't like it, feel free to make it a config
> option (enabled by default!) and submit an updated patch.
> My original patch against 2.4.9 is at the end.
>
> Tuesday, October 09, 2001, 11:32:24 AM,
> "Marco Berizzi" <pupilla@hotmail.com> wrote:
> MB> I updated my motherboard from ASUS A7V to ABIT KT7A (VIA Apollo KT133A
> MB> chipset). The kernel I had (2.4.10) started crashing on boot  usually
> MB> right after starting init. I tryed a i686 kernel and noticed it works
> MB> OK, so I recompiled my crashy kernel only switching the processor type
> MB> and it also worked. Changed it back to Athlon/K7/Duron and it starts
> MB> crashing.
>
> MB> I also search the mailing list. My mother board is KT7A series v1.3 with
> MB> bios revision 4T (I also try with 3N, same results). K7 at 1333MHz. BIOS
> MB> settings are default (except I have disabled all BIOS/video shadow).
> MB> After flash I also reset CMOS via hardware jumper.
>
> MB> Is there any solution to this (except compiling kernel for 6x86)?
> --
> Best regards, VDA
> mailto:VDA@port.imtp.ilyichevsk.odessa.ua
>
> --- pci-pc.c.orig       Sun Aug 12 15:54:07 2001
> +++ pci-pc.c    Tue Sep 18 16:45:21 2001
> @@ -948,6 +948,26 @@
>         d->irq = 9;
>  }
>
> +/* Fixes some oopses on Athlon optimized
> + * fast_copy_page when it uses 'movntq's
> + * instead of 'movq's on Athlon/Duron optimized kernels.
> + * Bit 7 at offset 0x55 seems to be responsible:
> + * > Device 0 Offset 55 - Debug (RW)
> + * >   Bits 7-0: Reserved (do not program). default = 0
> + * ABIT KT7A 3R BIOS: 0x89 (oopses)
> + * ABIT KT7A YH BIOS: 0x00 (works)
> + */
> +static void __init pci_fixup_athlon_bug(struct pci_dev *d)
> +{
> +       u8 v;
> +        pci_read_config_byte(d, 0x55, &v);
> +        if(v & 0x80) {
> +                printk(KERN_NOTICE "Stomping on Athlon bug.\n");
> +                v &= 0x7f; /* clear bit 55.7 */
> +                pci_write_config_byte(d, 0x55, v);
> +        }
> +}
> +
>  struct pci_fixup pcibios_fixups[] = {
>         { PCI_FIXUP_HEADER,     PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL,
> PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_82451NX,    pci_fixup_i450nx },
>         { PCI_FIXUP_HEADER,     PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL,
> PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_82454GX,    pci_fixup_i450gx },
> @@ -961,6 +981,7 @@
>  /* Our bus code shouldnt need this fixup any more. Delete once
> verified */
>         { PCI_FIXUP_HEADER,     PCI_VENDOR_ID_COMPAQ,
> PCI_DEVICE_ID_COMPAQ_6010,      pci_fixup_compaq },
>  #endif
> +       { PCI_FIXUP_HEADER,     PCI_VENDOR_ID_VIA,
> PCI_DEVICE_ID_VIA_8363_0,       pci_fixup_athlon_bug },
>         { PCI_FIXUP_HEADER,     PCI_VENDOR_ID_UMC,
> PCI_DEVICE_ID_UMC_UM8886BF,     pci_fixup_umc_ide },
>         { PCI_FIXUP_HEADER,     PCI_VENDOR_ID_SI,
> PCI_DEVICE_ID_SI_5513,          pci_fixup_ide_trash },
>         { PCI_FIXUP_HEADER,     PCI_ANY_ID,             PCI_ANY_ID,
> pci_fixup_ide_bases },
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>