[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] How many patches are missing in upstream Linux?
On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 04:09:20PM +0100, Atom2 wrote: > > > Am 12.03.14 14:50, schrieb Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk: > >On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 12:58:13PM +0100, Atom2 wrote: > >I am still not sure why it does not work for you but it works for me so > >perhaps: > > > >a) the cpio archive is not being parsed by the 'ucode=scan' code. > > The patch attached can help in narrowing that possibility. > > > >b). The blobs are corrupted (also the patch below should help with that). > > > >c). Somethng else :-) > > > >Could you kindly try the attached patch? That should help in figuring out > >one of these options above. > I'd be very happy to be of help here - but, and that appears to be > odd, my version of xen does _NOT_ contain a function > microcode_scan_module. So your patch won't apply and fails for hunk > #2 and #3: > > # patch -p1 --dry-run < microcode-debug.patch > (Stripping trailing CRs from patch.) > patching file xen/arch/x86/microcode.c > Hunk #2 FAILED at 138. > Hunk #3 FAILED at 155. > 2 out of 3 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file > xen/arch/x86/microcode.c.rej > (Stripping trailing CRs from patch.) > patching file xen/arch/x86/microcode_intel.c > > On the other hand I guess that missing function certainly does > explain why the system can't scan and thus can't find the payload > included in the module. So in the end, I guess I nevertheless have > been able to somehow help ... (:-) Hehe. > > As the update with a separate module (multiboot) works, the rest of > the infrastructure for microcode updates seems to be there and > working. > > Is the function microcode_scan_module not part of the upstream xen > that is being used by distributions? Or did just gentoo miss > something here - although Jeremy also said that he was unable to get > it to work unless provided in a separate file? Though I have no clue > what distribution he is using ... > > BTW the version of XEN I'm using is 4.3.1-r5 (the latest stable > version of gentoo). Right. And Xen 4.4 is the one that got the ucode=scan code support :-) > > > >You should see something like this (this is on a SandyBridge) if it works: > > > >$xl dmesg | grep -i microcode > >(XEN) microcode payload @1 found (576512) > >(XEN) microcode: collect_cpu_info : sig=0x206a7, pf=0x2, rev=0x28 > >(XEN) microcode: CPU0 found a matching microcode update with version 0x29 > >(current=0x28) > >(XEN) microcode: CPU0 updated from revision 0x28 to 0x29, date = 2013-06-12 > >(XEN) microcode: collect_cpu_info : sig=0x206a7, pf=0x2, rev=0x28 > >(XEN) microcode: CPU1 found a matching microcode update with version 0x29 > >(current=0x28) > >(XEN) microcode: CPU1 updated from revision 0x28 to 0x29, date = 2013-06-12 > >(XEN) microcode: collect_cpu_info : sig=0x206a7, pf=0x2, rev=0x28 > >(XEN) microcode: CPU3 found a matching microcode update with version 0x29 > >(current=0x28) > >(XEN) microcode: CPU3 updated from revision 0x28 to 0x29, date = 2013-06-12 > >(XEN) microcode: collect_cpu_info : sig=0x206a7, pf=0x2, rev=0x29 > >(XEN) microcode: collect_cpu_info : sig=0x206a7, pf=0x2, rev=0x28 > >(XEN) microcode: CPU2 found a matching microcode update with version 0x29 > >(current=0x28) > >(XEN) microcode: CPU2 updated from revision 0x28 to 0x29, date = 2013-06-12 > >(XEN) microcode: collect_cpu_info : sig=0x206a7, pf=0x2, rev=0x29 > >(XEN) microcode: collect_cpu_info : sig=0x206a7, pf=0x2, rev=0x29 > >(XEN) microcode: collect_cpu_info : sig=0x206a7, pf=0x2, rev=0x29 _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |