[lkml]   [2011]   [Mar]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH RFC] x86: avoid atomic operation in test_and_set_bit_lock if possible

    * Robert Richter <> wrote:

    > > Its all a big clusterfuck and really the best way (IMO) is what we have
    > > now to put pressure on and force the BIOS vendors to play nice.
    > >
    > > I assume both HP and DELL will be seriously unhappy with the kernel
    > > spewing FIRMWARE BUG messages on boot on their boxen, the question is,
    > > will they be unhappy enough to fix it..
    > So, we better stick then with option 1. My experience is that new
    > system's bioses try not to claim perfctrs (affected systems I have
    > seen are about 2-3 years old), but I am not really sure here.

    That's good news - BIOSen unilaterally stealing PMU real estate is a really
    utterly crazy concept.

    For a limited physical resource like the PMU the correct approach to add
    PMU-using features is to add an OS driver that implements the feature via the
    regular PMU access functions. We already have such features so it's very much
    possible. That way it all becomes controllable and configurable to the user.



     \ /
      Last update: 2011-03-25 20:35    [W:0.020 / U:82.212 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site