On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 04:36:33PM +, Liang, Kan wrote:
> >
> > Thanks, that fixes it.
> >
> > Note: your patch appears to be against linux-next. I had to change
> > "arch/x86/events/intel/uncore_snbep.c" to
> > "arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore_snbep.c" for the patch to
> > apply
>
> Thanks, that fixes it.
>
> Note: your patch appears to be against linux-next. I had to change
> "arch/x86/events/intel/uncore_snbep.c" to
> "arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore_snbep.c" for the patch to
> apply against current linux-git.
Thanks for the verification.
I think the per
Thanks, that fixes it.
Note: your patch appears to be against linux-next. I had to change
"arch/x86/events/intel/uncore_snbep.c" to
"arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore_snbep.c" for the patch to
apply against current linux-git.
Tested-by: Tony Battersby
On 02/24/2016 10:37 AM, Liang, K
I have no idea why the original email was redirected to Junk folder.
Sorry for the late response.
I extended BDX-DE uncore code to support BDX-EP. So they share
the same code path. But there is no sbox in BDX-DE.
I once tried the BDX-EP patch on my BDX-DE, it boots fine.
But it looks it doesn't
Added Liang to CC, preserved full mail for reference
On Wed, 17 Feb 2016, Tony Battersby wrote:
> The following commit in 4.5 is causing a general protection fault during
> early boot:
>
> d6980ef32570 ("perf/x86/intel/uncore: Add Broadwell-EP uncore support")
>
> With the commit reverted, the
5 matches
Mail list logo
