Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 17:27:15 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
Cc: davej@redhat.com, torvalds@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       richard.brunner@amd.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Mutilated form of Andi Kleen's AMD prefetch errata
 patch
Message-Id: <20030930172715.18acace9.akpm@osdl.org>
In-Reply-To: <20030930235528.GA32209@mail.shareable.org>
References: <20030930073814.GA26649@mail.jlokier.co.uk>
	<20030930132211.GA23333@redhat.com>
	<20030930133936.GA28876@mail.shareable.org>
	<20030930135324.GC5507@redhat.com>
	<20030930144526.GC28876@mail.shareable.org>
	<20030930150825.GD5507@redhat.com>
	<20030930165450.GF28876@mail.shareable.org>
	<20030930172618.GE5507@redhat.com>
	<20030930235528.GA32209@mail.shareable.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org

Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org> wrote:
>
> What I'd really like your opinion on is the appropriate userspace
> behaviour.  If we don't care about fixing up userspace, then
> __ex_table is a much tidier workaround for the prefetch bug.

I think we should fix up userspace.

>  If we do
> care about fixing up userspace, then do we need a policy decision that
> says it's not acceptable to run on AMD without userspace fixups from
> 2.6.0 onwards - it must fixup userspace or refuse to run?

If you're saying that the kernel should refuse to boot if it discovers that
a) the CPU needs the workaround and b) the kernel does not implement the
workaround then yup.

-
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/