On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 13:15:04 +0200, Mattia Dongili wrote: > On Sat, Jul 15, 2006 at 12:26:48PM +0200, Martin Michlmayr wrote: >> * Bastian Blank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-07-15 02:17]: >> > > thanks to Martin who added all pending 2.6.16 minor releases, we should >> > > now upload the package as soon as possible, to have the local root hole >> > > fixed in the testing kernel - 2.6.15 is vulnerable too. >> > We need to integrate 18b0bbd8ca6d3cb90425aa0d77b99a762c6d6de3, but I >> > think we will see at least 2.6.17.5 today. >> >> I've applied 2.6.16.25 and the "Relax /proc fix a bit" patch to the >> 2.6.16 tree. > > may I also suggest 436fe7b8b4a5016ef1fcb32bff77bde84003e15d ? > > description is: > [CPUFREQ] Make powernow-k7 work on SMP kernels. > Even though powernow-k7 doesn't work in SMP environments, > it can work on an SMP configured kernel if there's only > one CPU present, however recalibrate_cpu_khz was returning > -EINVAL on such kernels, so we failed to init the cpufreq driver. > > Current k7 kernels are being built with SMP=y so they don't allow > powernow-k7 being loaded on non-SMP on UP systems. > A similar fix has been in Ubuntu kernels since February. > The same patch is probably useful for 2.6.16 too.
I can't use the Debian 2.6.17 k7 kernels because powernow-k7 is broken. It's the same modprobe error message as discussed here: <http://lists.debian.org/debian-italian/2006/07/msg00108.html> My notebook can just shut itself off when running on batteries with max frequency using 100% cpu so a working powernow-k7 module is critical. Since the Debian 2.6.16 (tested up to -16) k7 kernels work and the Debian 2.6.17 (-1 and -3) k7 kernels don't can you please first apply this patch to 2.6.17 kernel source. I can then let you know whether new 2.6.17 kernels are usable. Please don't accidentally break Debian's 2.6.16 kernel source until 2.6.17 is at least a usable alternative. My notebook is a single processor Compaq Presario 900 series with a Mobile AMD Athlon(tm) XP 1800+. Even with the fatal modprobe powernow-k7 message with linux-image-2.6.17-1-k7 (version 2.6.17-3) the CPU is correctly recognised: modprobe powernow-k7 FATAL: Error inserting powernow_k7 (/lib/modules/2.6.17-1-k7/kernel/arch/i386/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k7.ko): No such device ...dmesg reports: powernow: PowerNOW! Technology present. Can scale: frequency and voltage. ...and bootup /var/log/kern.log reports: powernow: PowerNOW! Technology present. Can scale: frequency and voltage. Detected 1523.982 MHz processor. powernow: SGTC: 13333 powernow: Minimum speed 530 MHz. Maximum speed 1523 MHz. Could the underscore in the message "Error inserting powernow_k7" be an important detail? The name of the module is powernow-k7, not powernow_k7. I have downloaded and differenced these parts of linux-source-2.6.16 (2.6.16-16) and linux-source-2.6.17 (2.6.17-3). powernow-k7.c appears to be functionally identical: diff -u linux-source-2.6.16/arch/i386/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k7.c /usr/src/linux-source-2.6.17/arch/i386/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k7.c --- linux-source-2.6.16/arch/i386/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k7.c 2006-03-20 17:53:29.000000000 +1200 +++ /usr/src/linux-source-2.6.17/arch/i386/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k7.c 2006-06-18 13:49:35.000000000 +1200 @@ -199,8 +199,8 @@ powernow_table[j].index |= (vid << 8); /* upper 8 bits */ dprintk (" FID: 0x%x (%d.%dx [%dMHz]) " - "VID: 0x%x (%d.%03dV)\n", fid, fid_codes[fid] / 10, - fid_codes[fid] % 10, speed/1000, vid, + "VID: 0x%x (%d.%03dV)\n", fid, fid_codes[fid] / 10, + fid_codes[fid] % 10, speed/1000, vid, mobile_vid_table[vid]/1000, mobile_vid_table[vid]%1000); } @@ -368,8 +368,8 @@ } dprintk (" FID: 0x%x (%d.%dx [%dMHz]) " - "VID: 0x%x (%d.%03dV)\n", fid, fid_codes[fid] / 10, - fid_codes[fid] % 10, speed/1000, vid, + "VID: 0x%x (%d.%03dV)\n", fid, fid_codes[fid] / 10, + fid_codes[fid] % 10, speed/1000, vid, mobile_vid_table[vid]/1000, mobile_vid_table[vid]%1000); @@ -460,7 +460,7 @@ (maxfid==pst->maxfid) && (startvid==pst->startvid)) { dprintk ("PST:%d (@%p)\n", i, pst); - dprintk (" cpuid: 0x%x fsb: %d maxFID: 0x%x startvid: 0x%x\n", + dprintk (" cpuid: 0x%x fsb: %d maxFID: 0x%x startvid: 0x%x\n", pst->cpuid, pst->fsbspeed, pst->maxfid, pst->startvid); ret = get_ranges ((char *) pst + sizeof (struct pst_s)); diff -s linux-source-2.6.16/arch/i386/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c /usr/src/linux-source-2.6.17/arch/i386/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c Files linux-source-2.6.16/arch/i386/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c and /usr/src/linux-source-2.6.17/arch/i386/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c are identical There's one difference in amd.c: diff -u linux-source-2.6.16/arch/i386/kernel/cpu/amd.c /usr/src/linux-source-2.6.17/arch/i386/kernel/cpu/amd.c --- linux-source-2.6.16/arch/i386/kernel/cpu/amd.c 2006-07-09 04:03:31.000000000 +1200 +++ /usr/src/linux-source-2.6.17/arch/i386/kernel/cpu/amd.c 2006-06-18 13:49:35.000000000 +1200 @@ -214,8 +214,6 @@ if (cpuid_eax(0x80000000) >= 0x80000008) { c->x86_max_cores = (cpuid_ecx(0x80000008) & 0xff) + 1; - if (c->x86_max_cores & (c->x86_max_cores - 1)) - c->x86_max_cores = 1; } if (cpuid_eax(0x80000000) >= 0x80000007) { Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
