lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Feb]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] x86/perf/zhaoxin: Add stepping check for ZX-C
From
Hi Boris,

Thanks for your reply.

As I mentioned before, Nano has several series. We cannot test if all of
them have the bug. Besides, AFAIK Nano's hardware support for PMC has
not externally announced. So setting a new X86_BUG_ flag to Nano is
inappropriate.

I still think exclude PMC support in driver is more appropriate.

Looking forward to your comments.


On 2023/2/6 17:48, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 06, 2023 at 04:26:25PM +0800, silviazhaooc wrote:
>> Due to our company’s email policy, email address with oc suffix is used for
>> sending email without confidentiality statement at the end of the mail body.
>>
>> I will remove –oc from my name later.
>
> Yes, please. The email address is fine but the name doesn't have to have
> that funky "-oc" thing.
>
>> But due to some unknown historical reasons, the FMS of Nano and ZXC are only
>> different in stepping.
>>
>> I have considered about using the “Model name string” to distinguish them,
>> but it doesn't seem to be a common way in Linux kernel.
>
> I don't mind you using steppings to differentiate the two as long as
> this is not going to change all of a sudden and that differentiation is
> unambiguous.
>
> If not, you will have to use name strings as you don't have any other
> choice.
>
> Whatever you do, pls define a new X86_BUG_ flag, set it only on Nano and
> then test it in the PMU init code.
>
> Thx.
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-03-27 00:10    [W:0.530 / U:1.964 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site