Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753218AbbF2JfQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Jun 2015 05:35:16 -0400 Received: from mail-wi0-f179.google.com ([209.85.212.179]:37587 "EHLO mail-wi0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751741AbbF2JfJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Jun 2015 05:35:09 -0400 Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2015 11:35:04 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Borislav Petkov Cc: Mike Galbraith , Ingo Molnar , LKML , "H. Peter Anvin" , Thomas Gleixner , Andy Lutomirski , Denys Vlasenko , Oleg Nesterov , Dave Hansen Subject: Re: [all better] Re: regression: massive trouble with fpu rework Message-ID: <20150629093504.GA20600@gmail.com> References: <1435386316.3664.23.camel@gmail.com> <1435393129.3490.7.camel@gmail.com> <20150627082514.GA10894@gmail.com> <1435395328.6545.10.camel@gmail.com> <20150629064008.GA16251@gmail.com> <1435566329.2900.1.camel@gmail.com> <20150629083302.GA13113@pd.tnic> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150629083302.GA13113@pd.tnic> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1653 Lines: 54 * Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 10:25:29AM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > On Mon, 2015-06-29 at 08:40 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > * > > > Ok, so could you please move the fpu__init_system() further up and see which > > > position is that starts breaking with the BIOS option set? > > > > > > here's the current, broken layout of the code: > > > > > > get_cpu_cap(c); > > > [0] fpu__init_system(c); > > > > > > if (this_cpu->c_early_init) > > > this_cpu->c_early_init(c); > > > [0] is the only spot that breaks box. > > I bet it is that > > /* Unmask CPUID levels if masked: */ > if (c->x86 > 6 || (c->x86 == 6 && c->x86_model >= 0xd)) { > if (msr_clear_bit(MSR_IA32_MISC_ENABLE, > MSR_IA32_MISC_ENABLE_LIMIT_CPUID_BIT) > 0) { > c->cpuid_level = cpuid_eax(0); > get_cpu_cap(c); > } > } > > in early_init_intel(). If you feel like playing, you might comment it > out to see what happens. > > :-) Indeed, I bet that makes a difference! I wish that 'unmasking' logic came with more comments: - Why do BIOSen ever mask CPUIDs? - Why do we unmask the masking? - Why doesn't the kernel keep on working just fine even if certain CPUID aspects are turned off? Thanks, Ingo -- 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/