On 9 Jun 2003, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-06-09 at 14:18, Dave Jones wrote:
>
> > Any reason to restrict it to a single stepping ?
> > This means you have to upgrade memtest every time a new model
> > is released, which seems a bit of a pain.
>
> This is the patch I use, which seems to make sense, since I don't know
> of any other steppings. No point in parameterising the code until you
> have some parameters.
>
Grand. I threw in a break statement so it handles Athlons again.
Here is the patch against the original memtest for the mail archives.
thanks,
dan carpenter
Penguin Computing
--- init.c.orig Wed Jun 11 08:49:02 2003
+++ init.c Wed Jun 11 08:43:39 2003
@@ -402,6 +402,14 @@
}
l1_cache = cpu_id.cache_info[3];
l1_cache += cpu_id.cache_info[7];
+ break;
+ case 15:
+ cprint(LINE_CPU, 0, "AMD Opteron");
+ off = 11;
+ l1_cache = cpu_id.cache_info[3];
+ l1_cache += cpu_id.cache_info[7];
+ l2_cache = (cpu_id.cache_info[11] << 8);
+ l2_cache += cpu_id.cache_info[10];
}
break;
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jun 15 2003 - 22:00:28 EST