Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751841Ab2KOVza (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Nov 2012 16:55:30 -0500 Received: from mail-ee0-f46.google.com ([74.125.83.46]:50492 "EHLO mail-ee0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751492Ab2KOVz3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Nov 2012 16:55:29 -0500 Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 22:55:23 +0100 From: Andreas Herrmann To: Boris Ostrovsky Cc: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh , hpa@zytor.com, mingo@elte.hu, tglx@linutronix.de, bp@alien8.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, microcode, AMD: Add support for family 16h processors Message-ID: <20121115215523.GB6520@tweety> References: <1353004910-2204-1-git-send-email-boris.ostrovsky@amd.com> <20121115204503.GB18032@khazad-dum.debian.net> <50A55E04.9020606@amd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <50A55E04.9020606@amd.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1645 Lines: 54 On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 04:26:28PM -0500, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > > > On 11/15/2012 03:45 PM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > >On Thu, 15 Nov 2012, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > >>Add valid patch size for family 16h processors > >> > >>Signed-off-by: Boris Ostrovsky > > > >Is this something that needs to go to -stable ? > > > >> #define F1XH_MPB_MAX_SIZE 2048 > >> #define F14H_MPB_MAX_SIZE 1824 > >> #define F15H_MPB_MAX_SIZE 4096 > >>+#define F16H_MPB_MAX_SIZE 3458 > >> > >> switch (c->x86) { > >> case 0x14: > >>@@ -198,6 +199,9 @@ static unsigned int verify_patch_size(int cpu, u32 patch_size, > >> case 0x15: > >> max_size = F15H_MPB_MAX_SIZE; > >> break; > >>+ case 0x16: > >>+ max_size = F16H_MPB_MAX_SIZE; > >>+ break; > >> default: > >> max_size = F1XH_MPB_MAX_SIZE; > >> break; > > > >Because it looks like without this patch, some valid microcode updates > >would be rejected by the kernel... > > Right, patch loading will fail. > > I wasn't sure whether stable would be appropriate since this is > support for new HW. OTOH since this would result in loss of > functionality one could consider this a bug. Yes, it seems that a Cc: (at least for 3.2, 3.4, 3.6) can't hurt to ensure that most recent kernel releases properly handle ucode updates for family 16h CPUs (whenever they come out). Andreas -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/