* Re: Intel And Kenrel Programming (was: Nvidia is a great company)
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.44.0301131852100.9994-100000@localhost.localdomain>
@ 2003-01-14 9:39 ` Tigran Aivazian
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Tigran Aivazian @ 2003-01-14 9:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Valdis.Kletnieks; +Cc: Alan Cox, Linux Kernel Mailing List
Hi,
The answer is, yes, you are right. Not because no errors were found (who
knows about that!) but because no microcode was released to me by Intel
since the one you see on website. As soon as I get new microcode it will
be uploaded immediately, don't worry.
Regards
Tigran
> Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2003 14:46:08 -0500
> From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
> To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
> Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
> Subject: Re: Intel And Kenrel Programming (was: Nvidia is a great company)
>
> On Sun, 12 Jan 2003 16:45:24 GMT, Alan Cox said:
> > One thing that has been helpful is the microcode update stuff Intel did, we
> > hit few bugs that up to date microcode kill off
>
> http://www.urbanmyth.org/microcode/ says that microcode_ctl 1.06 is the
> latest, dated all the way back to 11 Jun 2001. Is that in fact the most
> recent? In this industry, I alway worry when "most recent" is 18 months
> old.
>
> Hopefully it's the most recent because no further errata have been found.;)
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Intel And Kenrel Programming (was: Nvidia is a great company)
2003-01-12 16:45 ` Alan Cox
2003-01-12 16:58 ` Rob Wilkens
@ 2003-01-12 19:46 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Valdis.Kletnieks @ 2003-01-12 19:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alan Cox; +Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 561 bytes --]
On Sun, 12 Jan 2003 16:45:24 GMT, Alan Cox said:
> One thing that has been helpful is the microcode update stuff Intel did, we
> hit few bugs that up to date microcode kill off
http://www.urbanmyth.org/microcode/ says that microcode_ctl 1.06 is the
latest, dated all the way back to 11 Jun 2001. Is that in fact the most
recent? In this industry, I alway worry when "most recent" is 18 months
old.
Hopefully it's the most recent because no further errata have been found.;)
--
Valdis Kletnieks
Computer Systems Senior Engineer
Virginia Tech
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 226 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Intel And Kenrel Programming (was: Nvidia is a great company)
2003-01-12 16:58 ` Rob Wilkens
@ 2003-01-12 17:54 ` Alan Cox
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Alan Cox @ 2003-01-12 17:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: robw; +Cc: Chuck Wolber, Valdis.Kletnieks, Linux Kernel Mailing List
On Sun, 2003-01-12 at 16:58, Rob Wilkens wrote:
> The hardware engineers, in my experience, will not refer to those issues
> as bugs, but rather as misdocumented features... No? I mean if an
> errata is enough to work around the problem, then the documentation was
> clearly the problem, and not the hardware implementation.
Intel seperate out things that are docmentation errors, clarifications
and actual bugs. They publish regular errata documents listing these,
and when they do decide to turn a flaw into a specification update they
document that too. AMD likewise.
Some vendors may not do this, but the x86 CPU vendors seem to do a good
job.
> As per the microcode updates, I noticed RedHat 8 was autoupdating
> microcode on each boot IIRC. I've since switched to Debian and don't
> know that it does this. Should I be concerned?
It depends on your chip revisions. For example the O(1) scheduler will trigger
very occasional random crashes or reboots with early PII Xeon microcode sets.
I'm sure Debian has a package for this somewhere.
Alan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Intel And Kenrel Programming (was: Nvidia is a great company)
2003-01-12 16:45 ` Alan Cox
@ 2003-01-12 16:58 ` Rob Wilkens
2003-01-12 17:54 ` Alan Cox
2003-01-12 19:46 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Rob Wilkens @ 2003-01-12 16:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alan Cox; +Cc: Chuck Wolber, Valdis.Kletnieks, Linux Kernel Mailing List
On Sun, 2003-01-12 at 11:45, Alan Cox wrote:
> There are actually very few chips we don't have to deal with some kind
> of errata on, and the newer more complex chips generally have the larger
> collections of errata.
>
> One thing that has been helpful is the microcode update stuff Intel did, we
> hit few bugs that up to date microcode kill off
>
The hardware engineers, in my experience, will not refer to those issues
as bugs, but rather as misdocumented features... No? I mean if an
errata is enough to work around the problem, then the documentation was
clearly the problem, and not the hardware implementation.
As per the microcode updates, I noticed RedHat 8 was autoupdating
microcode on each boot IIRC. I've since switched to Debian and don't
know that it does this. Should I be concerned?
-Rob
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Intel And Kenrel Programming (was: Nvidia is a great company)
2003-01-12 14:42 ` Intel And Kenrel Programming (was: Nvidia is a great company) Rob Wilkens
@ 2003-01-12 16:45 ` Alan Cox
2003-01-12 16:58 ` Rob Wilkens
2003-01-12 19:46 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Alan Cox @ 2003-01-12 16:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: robw; +Cc: Chuck Wolber, Valdis.Kletnieks, Linux Kernel Mailing List
On Sun, 2003-01-12 at 14:42, Rob Wilkens wrote:
> Ignorring the well popularized floating point bug in the pentium, to
> which there was a bug, are there many other bugs you run accross in the
> pentium while kernel programming?
There are actually very few chips we don't have to deal with some kind
of errata on, and the newer more complex chips generally have the larger
collections of errata.
One thing that has been helpful is the microcode update stuff Intel did, we
hit few bugs that up to date microcode kill off
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Intel And Kenrel Programming (was: Nvidia is a great company)
2003-01-12 7:47 Nvidia and its choice to read the GPL "differently" Chuck Wolber
@ 2003-01-12 14:42 ` Rob Wilkens
2003-01-12 16:45 ` Alan Cox
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Rob Wilkens @ 2003-01-12 14:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Chuck Wolber; +Cc: Valdis.Kletnieks, Linux kernel list
On Sun, 2003-01-12 at 02:47, Chuck Wolber wrote:
> > > As per buggy hardware, the software should _not_ have to support it.
> > > The software should report that the hardware has a bug and stop.
> > > Otherwise, you wind up writing really bad code for other hardware at
> > > the same time that you're trying to work with one particular piece of
> > > bad hardware.
>
> Good point! It's time we stopped supporting those Intel processors...
Ignorring the well popularized floating point bug in the pentium, to
which there was a bug, are there many other bugs you run accross in the
pentium while kernel programming?
-Rob
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-01-14 9:29 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.44.0301131852100.9994-100000@localhost.localdomain>
2003-01-14 9:39 ` Intel And Kenrel Programming (was: Nvidia is a great company) Tigran Aivazian
2003-01-12 7:47 Nvidia and its choice to read the GPL "differently" Chuck Wolber
2003-01-12 14:42 ` Intel And Kenrel Programming (was: Nvidia is a great company) Rob Wilkens
2003-01-12 16:45 ` Alan Cox
2003-01-12 16:58 ` Rob Wilkens
2003-01-12 17:54 ` Alan Cox
2003-01-12 19:46 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).