On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 01:26:48PM -0500, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> On 12/07/2017 05:03, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 03:08:49PM -0500, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> >> ...
> >> Probably. However, I am just trying to fix my FX-8350 and A10-6800 and
> >> I don't have Zen processors to veri
On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 6:23 AM, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> On 07/12/2017 12:03, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 03:08:49PM -0500, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
>>> ...
>>> Probably. However, I am just trying to fix my FX-8350 and A10-6800 and
>>> I don't have Zen processors to verify the MSRs
On 07/12/2017 12:03, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 03:08:49PM -0500, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
>> ...
>> Probably. However, I am just trying to fix my FX-8350 and A10-6800 and
>> I don't have Zen processors to verify the MSRs are actually working on
>> those CPUs.
>
> Ah, that's so l
On 12/07/2017 05:03, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 03:08:49PM -0500, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
>> ...
>> Probably. However, I am just trying to fix my FX-8350 and A10-6800 and
>> I don't have Zen processors to verify the MSRs are actually working on
>> those CPUs.
>
> Ah, that's so l
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 03:08:49PM -0500, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> ...
> Probably. However, I am just trying to fix my FX-8350 and A10-6800 and
> I don't have Zen processors to verify the MSRs are actually working on
> those CPUs.
Ah, that's so lovely, thanks Jung-uk; I feel that our support for AMD
On 30/11/2017 22:47, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> On 11/30/2017 15:31, Conrad Meyer wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 12:08 PM, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
>>> On 11/30/2017 14:32, Conrad Meyer wrote:
Hi,
I don't think this answers the second question about the conditional.
It seems like PCPU_G
On 11/30/2017 15:31, Conrad Meyer wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 12:08 PM, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
>> On 11/30/2017 14:32, Conrad Meyer wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I don't think this answers the second question about the conditional.
>>> It seems like PCPU_GET() for the initial CPU should be pulled out of
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 12:08 PM, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> On 11/30/2017 14:32, Conrad Meyer wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I don't think this answers the second question about the conditional.
>> It seems like PCPU_GET() for the initial CPU should be pulled out of
>> the loop, which binds the thread to a differ
On 11/30/2017 14:32, Conrad Meyer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I don't think this answers the second question about the conditional.
> It seems like PCPU_GET() for the initial CPU should be pulled out of
> the loop, which binds the thread to a different CPU every iteration.
Ah, good catch. I'll fix it soon.
Hi,
I don't think this answers the second question about the conditional.
It seems like PCPU_GET() for the initial CPU should be pulled out of
the loop, which binds the thread to a different CPU every iteration.
Also, as a side effect of disabling verification, you have fixed PR
221621, 219213, a
On 11/30/2017 13:57, Conrad Meyer wrote:
> Hi Jung-uk,
>
> I have some questions about this change.
>
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:40 PM, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
>> Author: jkim
>> Date: Thu Nov 30 01:40:07 2017
>> New Revision: 326383
>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/326383
>>
>> Log
Hi Jung-uk,
I have some questions about this change.
On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:40 PM, Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> Author: jkim
> Date: Thu Nov 30 01:40:07 2017
> New Revision: 326383
> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/326383
>
> Log:
> Add a tunable "debug.hwpstate_verify" to check P-st
12 matches
Mail list logo
