On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 03:37:19PM +0200, Johannes Hirte wrote:
> Just tested your amd-ucode branch with CONFIG_MICROCODE_AMD_EARLY
> re-enabled and it works so far.
Ok, that's good news. Thanks a lot!
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
On Thu, 8 Aug 2013 21:29:43 +0200
Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 09:32:50PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > Btw, this patch is the one that fixes the boot issue on your box,
> > correct?
> >
> > If so, please put a minimal version of it in the next patch set
> > you're
On Thu, 8 Aug 2013 21:29:43 +0200
Borislav Petkov b...@alien8.de wrote:
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 09:32:50PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
Btw, this patch is the one that fixes the boot issue on your box,
correct?
If so, please put a minimal version of it in the next patch set
you're
On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 03:37:19PM +0200, Johannes Hirte wrote:
Just tested your amd-ucode branch with CONFIG_MICROCODE_AMD_EARLY
re-enabled and it works so far.
Ok, that's good news. Thanks a lot!
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
To
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 09:32:50PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> Btw, this patch is the one that fixes the boot issue on your box,
> correct?
>
> If so, please put a minimal version of it in the next patch set you're
> sending right after
Ok, I've wiggled it ontop of the cpu_has_amd_erratum()
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 09:32:50PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
Btw, this patch is the one that fixes the boot issue on your box,
correct?
If so, please put a minimal version of it in the next patch set you're
sending right after
Ok, I've wiggled it ontop of the cpu_has_amd_erratum() patch,
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 11:06:10PM +0200, Torsten Kaiser wrote:
> load_microcode_amd() (and the helper it is using) should not have an
> cpu parameter. The microcode loading is not depending on the CPU it is
> executed and all the loaded patches will end up in a global list for all
> CPUs anyway.
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 11:06:10PM +0200, Torsten Kaiser wrote:
load_microcode_amd() (and the helper it is using) should not have an
cpu parameter. The microcode loading is not depending on the CPU it is
executed and all the loaded patches will end up in a global list for all
CPUs anyway.
The
load_microcode_amd() (and the helper it is using) should not have an
cpu parameter. The microcode loading is not depending on the CPU it is
executed and all the loaded patches will end up in a global list for all
CPUs anyway.
The change from cpu to x86family in load_microcode_amd() now allows to
load_microcode_amd() (and the helper it is using) should not have an
cpu parameter. The microcode loading is not depending on the CPU it is
executed and all the loaded patches will end up in a global list for all
CPUs anyway.
The change from cpu to x86family in load_microcode_amd() now allows to
10 matches
Mail list logo
