From: Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@it.uu.se>
To: Arkadiusz Miskiewicz <arekm@maven.pl>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Opteron Rev E has a bug ... a locked instruction doesn't act as a read-acquire barrier
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2008 15:26:11 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <18583.883.70907.983634@harpo.it.uu.se> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200808031106.12366.arekm@maven.pl>
Arkadiusz Miskiewicz writes:
>
> Hello,
>
> http://google-perftools.googlecode.com/svn-history/r48/trunk/src/base/atomicops-internals-x86.cc
> says
>
> " // Opteron Rev E has a bug in which on very rare occasions a locked
> // instruction doesn't act as a read-acquire barrier if followed by a
> // non-locked read-modify-write instruction. Rev F has this bug in
> // pre-release versions, but not in versions released to customers,
> // so we test only for Rev E, which is family 15, model 32..63 inclusive.
> if (strcmp(vendor, "AuthenticAMD") == 0 && // AMD
> family == 15 &&
> 32 <= model && model <= 63) {
> AtomicOps_Internalx86CPUFeatures.has_amd_lock_mb_bug = true;
> } else {
> AtomicOps_Internalx86CPUFeatures.has_amd_lock_mb_bug = false;
> }
> "
>
> does kernel have quirk/workaround for this? I'm looking at arch/x86/kernel/cpu
> but I don't see workaround related to this (possibly I'm overlooking).
I can find no reference to this alleged RevE erratum in the
Athlon64/Opteron revision guide (25759.pdf).
But if this bug is real then we need to know about it. Could
you ask the author of the code you quoted above to clarify?
/Mikael
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-08-04 13:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-08-03 9:06 Opteron Rev E has a bug ... a locked instruction doesn't act as a read-acquire barrier Arkadiusz Miskiewicz
2008-08-04 13:26 ` Mikael Pettersson [this message]
2008-08-04 13:56 ` Arkadiusz Miskiewicz
2008-08-04 14:54 ` Mikael Pettersson
2008-08-06 13:09 ` Mikael Pettersson
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=18583.883.70907.983634@harpo.it.uu.se \
--to=mikpe@it.uu.se \
--cc=arekm@maven.pl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox