All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
Subject: Re: [Patch 4/4] x86/hpet: Don't clear reserved bits in the General Configuration Register
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 15:02:00 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5252BED8.7040102@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5252D97A02000078000F946B@nat28.tlf.novell.com>

On 07/10/13 14:55, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 07.10.13 at 15:26, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> wrote:
>> It is a violation of the specification.
>>
>> The reserved bits in the General Configuration Register, unlike all other
>> reserved bits I have found in the spec, are specified as 'must never be
>> changed by the OS'.
> Mind pointing out where exactly you found this? I only find the
> usual "should not modify" statements, and it is really unclear
> whether leaving the bits alone is more compatible than clearing
> them (since a bit of unknown function being set may easily mean
> the HPET behaves in a way we don't expect).
>
> Jan
>

Hpet spec 1-0a.pdf Page 12

"General Configuration Register Bit Definitions"

For bits 63:2, (ignoring the spec reserved vs firmware reserved bits),
the requirement states:

"In order to preserve usage of these bits in the future, software should
not modify the value in
these bits until they are defined. This is done by doing a
“read-modify-write” to this
register."

In most cases Xen does correctly perform a read-modify-write, but not on
initialize examination of the hpet where it blindly tries to clear bits
it doesn't understand.

I did find it strange at the difference in the spec; All other reserved
bits I can find are specified as "must write 0".

~Andrew

  reply	other threads:[~2013-10-07 14:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-10-07 13:26 [Patch 0/4] HPET general fixes Andrew Cooper
2013-10-07 13:26 ` [Patch 1/4] x86/hpet: Basic cleanup Andrew Cooper
2013-10-07 13:26 ` [Patch 2/4] x86/hpet: Sanitise HPET ACPI table and warn about multiple tables Andrew Cooper
2013-10-07 13:45   ` Jan Beulich
2013-10-07 13:55     ` Andrew Cooper
2013-10-07 14:26       ` Jan Beulich
2013-10-07 13:26 ` [Patch 3/4] x86/hpet: Fix ambiguity in broadcast info message Andrew Cooper
2013-10-07 13:48   ` Jan Beulich
2013-10-07 13:26 ` [Patch 4/4] x86/hpet: Don't clear reserved bits in the General Configuration Register Andrew Cooper
2013-10-07 13:55   ` Jan Beulich
2013-10-07 14:02     ` Andrew Cooper [this message]
2013-10-07 14:28       ` Jan Beulich

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=5252BED8.7040102@citrix.com \
    --to=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
    --cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
    /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.