[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Quoting Corey Osgood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>> Quoting Corey Osgood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >>> >>> >>>> I've separated this into two patches, one code and one microcode, to >>>> improve readability, but they would both have to be committed at once >>>> (else things break). These patches eliminate a lot of repeated code, >>>> make porting and adding new CPUs easier, add all the latest released >>>> microcode updates, and add somewhat experimental support for the >>>> latest >>>> lga775 cpus, along with various other currently unsupported CPUs. >>>> Unfortunately, not everything works quite right yet. Here's the >>>> broken >>>> stuff: >>>> >>>> * socket_603: includes all Xeon model f0x, f1x, and f2x cpus. This >>>> may >>>> be incorrect, but I can't see any easy way to find out. >>>> * socket_604: includes all Xeon model f2x, f3x, f4x, and f6x. Same as >>>> above, with the added bonus of being too large to fit with any current >>>> board. It should also include the socket_603 IDs, since socket 603 >>>> CPUs >>>> work on socket 604 boards. >>>> * socket_775: too large to build with most current ports, but it >>>> could >>>> probably be broken down into socket_775_pentium and >>>> socket_775_core. All >>>> fxx IDs are pentium 4/D, and 6xx IDs are Core/Core 2 >>>> >>>> For now, I've left the current model_fxx and socket_*60*, so nothing >>>> breaks, but IMO the socket_603/604 I've added should be made to work. >>>> >>>> Both patches Signed-off-by: Corey Osgood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> >>>> >>> Hmm looks good. Should we add a quick note to each file to what >>> processor it belongs too? I think that would save developers time from >>> having to look it up when writing code for a new board? What do you >>> think? >>> >>> >>> Thanks - Joe >>> >>> >> Do you mean the microcode files? If so, the microcode update looks like >> this: >> >> Header >> Update Revision >> Date >> Processor Signature (CPU ID) >> ... >> >> So, the 4th entry in the update is always the CPU ID, and conveniently >> it's always the last one on the first line. It also makes grepping for >> them very easy, once you have the update broken down into smaller files. >> This is documented *somewhere* in LB, but I can't find it at the moment. >> It's also in the Intel architecture manual, volume 3a, table 9-6. >> >> In the past we labeled some CPU IDs as to what CPUs they belonged to. In >> truth, Intel uses the same CPU IDs for a variety of CPUs, for instance >> in some cases Celeron, Pentium X, and Xeons all share a common ID, since >> the core is still the same. So we can't really do that any more ;) >> >> -Corey >> > Oh ok, that makes sense. > > Acked-by: Joseph Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Thanks - Joe
Thanks, Joe. Anyone else have anything to say? Honestly expected more feedback, but if there are no objections I'll commit it tomorrow. The other thing I forgot to mention was that all the data on CPU IDs came from the existing code and this site: http://processorfinder.intel.com. Some of them are a bit unclear on what sockets they use, but if anything comes up wrong, we can easily correct it. -Corey -- linuxbios mailing list linuxbios@linuxbios.org http://www.linuxbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios