public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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

  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