On Fri, Nov 06, 2009 at 01:56:31PM +0100, Dmitry Adamushko wrote:
> 2009/11/6 Andreas Herrmann <herrmann.der.user@googlemail.com>:

   <snip>

> >> (CPU3 belongs to both sets) unless summarize_cpu_info() is utterly
> >> broken.
> >
> > I didn't check that yet.
> 
> Yeah, this behavior is likely due to a missing cpumask_clear() in
> summarize_cpu_info().

Yeah, that fixes the wrong messages.
The other problem of not-updated CPU microcode after suspend/resume persists.

> should be as follows:
> 
>       if (!alloc_cpumask_var(&cpulist, GFP_KERNEL))
>               return;
> 
> +    cpumask_clear(cpulist);

Better use zalloc_cpumask instead of alloc/clear.

> >> sure, my test is somewhat limited... anyway, first of all I'd like to
> >> get a clear understanding of your logs. Thanks for yout test btw. :-))
> >
> > I'll send you full logs asap.
> 
> Thanks. Maybe it's something about a particular sequence of actions
> that triggers this behavior. Or was it reproducible with the very
> first pm-suspend invocation after "modprobe microcode.ko"?

The sequence is:

1. loading microcode.ko
2. setting cpu2 offline
3. setting cpu2 online
4. suspend (pm-suspend)
5. resume

microcode of CPU2 is not updated:

  # for i in `seq 0 3`; do lsmsr -c $i PATCH_LEVEL; done
  PATCH_LEVEL          = 0x0000000001000083
  PATCH_LEVEL          = 0x0000000001000083
  PATCH_LEVEL          = 0x0000000001000065
  PATCH_LEVEL          = 0x0000000001000083

dmesg attached.

As I've said, that test used to pass with all CPUs updated to new
ucode in the past (at least that I think so ;-( -- but in contrast to
my previous mail this doesn't seem to be related to your patch. I
tested latest mainline and the test fails as well ... seems that I
need to do some debugging.


Regards,
Andreas

PS1: You should remove the needless newline from the patch level string:

 static int version_snprintf(char *buf, int len, struct cpu_signature *csig)
 {
-	return snprintf(buf, len, "patch_level=0x%x\n", csig->rev);
+	return snprintf(buf, len, "patch_level=0x%x", csig->rev);
 }
 
PS2: I plan to remove further needless messages from the amd ucode driver asap.