Re: [Fwd: CPU detection revamp (Request for comments)]

Re: [Fwd: CPU detection revamp (Request for comments)]

[davej]

Hi hpa,

 First test, the AMD K6-2.

Before your patch..
	cpu family      : 5
	model           : 8
	stepping        : 12

After..

	cpu family      : 5
	model           : 8
	stepping        : 4

Line 1826 of setup.c

	c->x86_mask = tfms & 7;

Should be..

	c->x86_mask = tfms & 15;

I think?

Also, look at the feature flags:
before:
flags           : fpu vme de pse tsc msr mce cx8 sep mtrr pge mmx 3dnow

after:
features        : fpu vme de pse tsc msr mce cx8 pge mmx syscall 3dnow

Note, I lost MTRR & sep. This may be related to the stepping bug
though. I'll recompile a kernel with the &15 fix, and see if that cures
all.

btw, whilst all this is getting a shakedown, how about renaming
that 'x86_mask' field to the more obvious 'x86_stepping' ?
c->x86 would make more sense as c->x86_family too thinking about it.

regards,

Davej.

-- 
| Dave Jones <davej@suse.de>  http://www.suse.de/~davej
| SuSE Labs

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [Fwd: CPU detection revamp (Request for comments)]

[H. Peter Anvin]

davej@suse.de wrote:
> 
> Hi hpa,
> 
>  First test, the AMD K6-2.
> 
> Before your patch..
>         cpu family      : 5
>         model           : 8
>         stepping        : 12
> 
> After..
> 
>         cpu family      : 5
>         model           : 8
>         stepping        : 4
> 
> Line 1826 of setup.c
> 
>         c->x86_mask = tfms & 7;
> 
> Should be..
> 
>         c->x86_mask = tfms & 15;
> 
> I think?
> 
> Also, look at the feature flags:
> before:
> flags           : fpu vme de pse tsc msr mce cx8 sep mtrr pge mmx 3dnow
> 
> after:
> features        : fpu vme de pse tsc msr mce cx8 pge mmx syscall 3dnow
> 
> Note, I lost MTRR & sep. This may be related to the stepping bug
> though. I'll recompile a kernel with the &15 fix, and see if that cures
> all.
> 

That is actually correct -- the K6-2 doesn't actually have mtrr and sep,
but has syscall and k6_mtrr instead (the stepping bug causes k6_mtrr not
to show up.)  Part of the bugginess of the old system was using one flag
for multiple purposes.  This was Linux' doing, not AMD's, by the way.

> btw, whilst all this is getting a shakedown, how about renaming
> that 'x86_mask' field to the more obvious 'x86_stepping' ?
> c->x86 would make more sense as c->x86_family too thinking about it.
> 

-- 
<hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [Fwd: CPU detection revamp (Request for comments)]

[davej]

On Fri, 10 Nov 2000, H. Peter Anvin wrote:

> That is actually correct -- the K6-2 doesn't actually have mtrr and sep,
> but has syscall and k6_mtrr instead (the stepping bug causes k6_mtrr not
> to show up.)  Part of the bugginess of the old system was using one flag
> for multiple purposes.  This was Linux' doing, not AMD's, by the way.

Yep, after the c->x86_mask = tfms & 15; change I got the correct
stepping, and the flags are now correct:-

features : fpu vme de pse tsc msr mce cx8 pge mmx syscall 3dnow k6_mtrr

regards,

davej.

-- 
| Dave Jones <davej@suse.de>  http://www.suse.de/~davej
| SuSE Labs

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [Fwd: CPU detection revamp (Request for comments)]

[Brian Gerst]

davej@suse.de wrote:
> 
> Hi hpa,
> 
>  First test, the AMD K6-2.
>
> Also, look at the feature flags:
> before:
> flags           : fpu vme de pse tsc msr mce cx8 sep mtrr pge mmx 3dnow
> 
> after:
> features        : fpu vme de pse tsc msr mce cx8 pge mmx syscall 3dnow
> 
> Note, I lost MTRR & sep. This may be related to the stepping bug
> though. I'll recompile a kernel with the &15 fix, and see if that cures
> all.

The K6's don't support sysenter/sysexit.  It really should have been
marked differently before.  The early K6's used extended bit 10 to
indicate syscall/sysret capabality, but this version has some quirks
that make it pretty much unusable.  Later K6's use extended bit 11 to
indicate syscall/sysret.

--

				Brian Gerst
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [Fwd: CPU detection revamp (Request for comments)]

[davej]

On Fri, 10 Nov 2000, Brian Gerst wrote:

> > features        : fpu vme de pse tsc msr mce cx8 pge mmx syscall 3dnow
> 
> The K6's don't support sysenter/sysexit.

The K6 datasheets suggests otherwise.
Some models seem to have sysenter/sysexit, whilst others have
syscall/sysret. No model seems to have both.

The datasheets are somewhat confusing, as it doesn't mention bit 10
at all, just an oversized box for bit 11.

> It really should have been marked differently before.

Before we weren't mentioning it at all, look..
flags  : fpu vme de pse tsc msr mce cx8 sep mtrr pge mmx 3dnow

> The early K6's used extended bit 10 to indicate syscall/sysret
> capabality, but this version has some quirks that make it pretty much
> unusable.  Later K6's use extended bit 11 to indicate syscall/sysret.

And where does sysenter/sysexit fit in?

regards,

Davej.

-- 
| Dave Jones <davej@suse.de>  http://www.suse.de/~davej
| SuSE Labs

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [Fwd: CPU detection revamp (Request for comments)]

[H. Peter Anvin]

davej@suse.de wrote:

> On Fri, 10 Nov 2000, Brian Gerst wrote:
> 
> > > features        : fpu vme de pse tsc msr mce cx8 pge mmx syscall 3dnow
> >
> > The K6's don't support sysenter/sysexit.
> 
> The K6 datasheets suggests otherwise.
> Some models seem to have sysenter/sysexit, whilst others have
> syscall/sysret. No model seems to have both.

Athlons have both.  Since the ext-bit 10 stuff is useless, I haven't
bothered reporting it at all.

> The datasheets are somewhat confusing, as it doesn't mention bit 10
> at all, just an oversized box for bit 11.
> 
> > It really should have been marked differently before.
> 
> Before we weren't mentioning it at all, look..
> flags  : fpu vme de pse tsc msr mce cx8 sep mtrr pge mmx 3dnow
> 
> > The early K6's used extended bit 10 to indicate syscall/sysret
> > capabality, but this version has some quirks that make it pretty much
> > unusable.  Later K6's use extended bit 11 to indicate syscall/sysret.
> 
> And where does sysenter/sysexit fit in?

sysenter/sysexit is the "sep" feature.

	-hpa

-- 
<hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [Fwd: CPU detection revamp (Request for comments)]

[davej]

On Fri, 10 Nov 2000, H. Peter Anvin wrote:

> > And where does sysenter/sysexit fit in?
> sysenter/sysexit is the "sep" feature.

Ah, of course.
*slaps head*

regards,

davej.

-- 
| Dave Jones <davej@suse.de>  http://www.suse.de/~davej
| SuSE Labs

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [Fwd: CPU detection revamp (Request for comments)]

[Brian Gerst]

davej@suse.de wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 10 Nov 2000, Brian Gerst wrote:
> 
> > > features        : fpu vme de pse tsc msr mce cx8 pge mmx syscall 3dnow
> >
> > The K6's don't support sysenter/sysexit.
> 
> The K6 datasheets suggests otherwise.
> Some models seem to have sysenter/sysexit, whilst others have
> syscall/sysret. No model seems to have both.
> 
> The datasheets are somewhat confusing, as it doesn't mention bit 10
> at all, just an oversized box for bit 11.

The Athlons support sysenter and syscall, but the K6's only support
syscall.  The earlier version of syscall (bit 10) is undocumented by
AMD.

--

				Brian Gerst
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [Fwd: CPU detection revamp (Request for comments)]

[davej]

On Fri, 10 Nov 2000, Brian Gerst wrote:

> > The datasheets are somewhat confusing, as it doesn't mention bit 10
> > at all, just an oversized box for bit 11.
> The Athlons support sysenter and syscall, but the K6's only support
> syscall.  The earlier version of syscall (bit 10) is undocumented by
> AMD.

Ah, thanks for clearing that up.

regards,

davej.

-- 
| Dave Jones <davej@suse.de>  http://www.suse.de/~davej
| SuSE Labs

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/