From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian@breakpoint.cc>
Cc: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, mail@tobiasvolk.de
Subject: Re: enable padlock on x86_64
Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2009 12:47:32 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090314114732.GB3805@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1237029843-28076-1-git-send-email-sebastian@breakpoint.cc>
* Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian@breakpoint.cc> wrote:
> To enable the padlock unit, two msr bits have to flipped. This is allready
> done in the 32bit path and is missing in the other. Instead of copy paste
> the code, I merged the 64bit part into the 32bit part. The things that
> changed during the merge:
> - the fixups from x86_64 (family 6, model >= 15) were not present in 32bit
> path but are now. They might be usefull if this CPU is booted in 32bit
> mode.
> - the fixups which are executed via ->c_early_init() are now executed
> again via ->c_init(). This was done in the 64bit path and without this I
> lost the constant_tsc flag. However, tsc is not useable due to
> | [ 2.023006] Marking TSC unstable due to TSC halts in idle
> | [ 2.500082] Clocksource tsc unstable (delta = -326436711 ns)
>
> The two patches are against the current tip tree. A version of
> patch 1 against current -rc8 is available at [0].
thanks, looks good. We can apply #1 to -tip just fine - but a
drivers/crypto/ change should go via the crypto tree. Can the
crypto tree apply #2 without having #1 right away? [i.e. will it
still build and boot fine - even though the padlock
functionality might not be fully present on 32-bit? ]
Then in 2.6.30 once both the x86 tree and the crypto tree are
merged we'll have both changes combined.
Does that sound good?
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-03-14 11:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <49B83002.9040705@tobiasvolk.de>
2009-03-14 11:24 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2009-03-14 11:47 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2009-03-14 11:53 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2009-03-14 13:24 ` Herbert Xu
2009-04-20 22:09 ` Chuck Ebbert
2009-04-21 5:59 ` Herbert Xu
2009-03-14 11:24 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86/centaur: merge 32 & 64 bit version Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2009-03-14 15:30 ` [tip:x86/cpu] " Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2009-03-14 11:24 ` [PATCH 2/2] crypto/padlock: enable on x86_64 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
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=20090314114732.GB3805@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mail@tobiasvolk.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=sebastian@breakpoint.cc \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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®