1. 05 1月, 2009 1 次提交
  2. 04 1月, 2009 1 次提交
  3. 03 1月, 2009 7 次提交
  4. 02 1月, 2009 1 次提交
  5. 01 1月, 2009 1 次提交
  6. 31 12月, 2008 8 次提交
  7. 30 12月, 2008 7 次提交
  8. 27 12月, 2008 3 次提交
  9. 26 12月, 2008 4 次提交
  10. 25 12月, 2008 2 次提交
  11. 24 12月, 2008 3 次提交
  12. 23 12月, 2008 1 次提交
    • H
      x86: prioritize the FPU traps for the error code · adf77bac
      H. Peter Anvin 提交于
      In the case of multiple FPU errors, prioritize the error codes,
      instead of returning __SI_FAULT, which ends up pushing a 0 as the
      error code to userspace, a POSIX violation.
      
      For i386, we will simply return if there are no errors at all; for
      x86-64 this is probably a "can't happen" (and the code should be
      unified), but for this patch, return __SI_FAULT|SI_KERNEL if this ever
      happens.
      Signed-off-by: NH. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
      adf77bac
  13. 20 12月, 2008 1 次提交
    • D
      x86: fix resume (S2R) broken by Intel microcode module, on A110L · 280a9ca5
      Dmitry Adamushko 提交于
      Impact: fix deadlock
      
      This is in response to the following bug report:
      
      Bug-Entry       : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12100
      Subject         : resume (S2R) broken by Intel microcode module, on A110L
      Submitter       : Andreas Mohr <andi@lisas.de>
      Date            : 2008-11-25 08:48 (19 days old)
      Handled-By      : Dmitry Adamushko <dmitry.adamushko@gmail.com>
      
      [ The deadlock scenario has been discovered by Andreas Mohr ]
      
      I think I might have a logical explanation why the system:
      
        (http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12100)
      
      might hang upon resuming, OTOH it should have likely hanged each and every time.
      
      (1) possible deadlock in microcode_resume_cpu() if either 'if' section is
      taken;
      
      (2) now, I don't see it in spec. and can't experimentally verify it (newer
      ucodes don't seem to be available for my Core2duo)... but logically-wise, I'd
      think that when read upon resuming, the 'microcode revision' (MSR 0x8B) should
      be back to its original one (we need to reload ucode anyway so it doesn't seem
      logical if a cpu doesn't drop the version)... if so, the comparison with
      memcmp() for the full 'struct cpu_signature' is wrong... and that's how one of
      the aforementioned 'if' sections might have been triggered - leading to a
      deadlock.
      
      Obviously, in my tests I simulated loading/resuming with the ucode of the same
      version (just to see that the file is loaded/re-loaded upon resuming) so this
      issue has never popped up.
      
      I'd appreciate if someone with an appropriate system might give a try to the
      2nd patch (titled "fix a comparison && deadlock...").
      
      In any case, the deadlock situation is a must-have fix.
      Reported-by: NAndreas Mohr <andi@lisas.de>
      Signed-off-by: NDmitry Adamushko <dmitry.adamushko@gmail.com>
      Tested-by: NAndreas Mohr <andi@lisas.de>
      Signed-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
      Cc: <stable@kernel.org>
      Signed-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
      280a9ca5