From: matwey@sai.msu.ru
To: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-parport@lists.infradead.org,
hsommer@eso.org, gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk,
matwey.kornilov@gmail.com,
"Matwey V. Kornilov" <matwey@sai.msu.ru>
Subject: [PATCHv4 0/2] parport: parport_pc: Fix false-positives at checking for Intel bug
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 11:12:53 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1405667575-3291-1-git-send-email-matwey@sai.msu.ru> (raw)
From: "Matwey V. Kornilov" <matwey@sai.msu.ru>
Hi,
The following patch series is to deal with the issue on false-positives
of Intel EPP bug check [1].
More than a decade ago, the check was introduced in order to prevent EPP
operation on the some Intel LPT chipsets. The main issue to defence from
was CPU hang at EPP operation on broken chipsets. It is mentioned that
affected chipsets are Intel 82091. However, it is not known whether
there are others.
The check was implemented in strange manner. Now, there is no explanations
why. The check itself now leads to the false-positives, disabling EPP on
many PC-s (Dell OptiPlex series for instance). The latter is an issue.
As it was suggested by One Thousand Gnomes we implement the additional check of CPU model.
If CPU is Intel 80486 or Pentium, then it is considered as potentially affected by the initial problem, so the initial check is applied.
The patches organized as following:
1. Introduce-intel_bug_present-function.
The transparent refactoring of the check is performed.
Make the check be immutable regarding to ECR register.
2. Implement CPU model check to cut off false-positives
Based on CPU model, disable the check. The check is enabled only for Intel 80486 or Pentium.
[1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=630593
Suggested-by: One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Tested-by: Heiko Andreas Sommer <hsommer@eso.org>
Signed-off-by: Matwey V. Kornilov <matwey@sai.msu.ru>
---
Changes from v3:
- Do not introduce the additional option, rely on CPU model instead.
Changes from v2:
- The module option has more clear description
Changes from v1:
- Patch 1 fetched from right branch and now compiled
next reply other threads:[~2014-07-18 7:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-18 7:12 matwey [this message]
2014-07-18 7:12 ` [PATCHv4 1/2] parport: parport_pc: Introduce intel_bug_present function matwey
2014-07-18 7:12 ` [PATCHv4 2/2] parport: parport_pc: Implement CPU model check to cut off false-positives matwey
2014-07-18 7:31 ` Ondrej Zary
2014-08-13 8:04 ` Matwey V. Kornilov
2015-01-21 16:51 ` [Linux-parport] " Leopold Palomo-Avellaneda
2015-01-21 17:09 ` Matwey V. Kornilov
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=1405667575-3291-1-git-send-email-matwey@sai.msu.ru \
--to=matwey@sai.msu.ru \
--cc=gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hsommer@eso.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-parport@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=matwey.kornilov@gmail.com \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®