On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 01:10:13AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> I don't know which one, but I don't think it really matters.
We're not punishing innocent K8 machines just because you don't
remember.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
--
--
To unsubscribe fr
On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 12:01:10AM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c
> > index a220239..e7f5667 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c
> > @@ -551,6 +551,9 @@ static void init_amd_k8(struct cp
On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 08:50:30AM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
> From: Andi Kleen
>
> Every gs selector/index reload always paid an extra MFENCE
> between the two SWAPGS. This was to work around an old
> bug in early K8 steppings. All other CPUs don't need the extra
> mfence. Patch the extra MFENCE
On Fri, Apr 10, 2015 at 8:50 AM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> From: Andi Kleen
>
> Every gs selector/index reload always paid an extra MFENCE
> between the two SWAPGS. This was to work around an old
> bug in early K8 steppings. All other CPUs don't need the extra
> mfence. Patch the extra MFENCE only in
On 11/10/2014 03:55 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> From: Andi Kleen
>
> Every gs selector/index reload always paid an extra MFENCE
> between the two SWAPGS. This was to work around an old
> bug in early K8 steppings. All other CPUs don't need the extra
> mfence. Patch the extra MFENCE only in for K8.
>
5 matches
Mail list logo
