On Tuesday 29 January 2008 06:36:43 pm Richard Todd wrote: > bruce_at_zuhause.mn.org writes: > > > I'm curious, though, should I be worried about the memcontrol list > > entries that are listed as "set-by-firmware active bogus"? > > > > 0x0/0xf080000000 BIOS write-back set-by-firmware active bogus > > 0x80000000/0xf040000000 BIOS write-back set-by-firmware active bogus > > 0xc0000000/0xf010000000 BIOS write-back set-by-firmware active bogus > > 0xcf800000/0xf000800000 BIOS uncacheable set-by-firmware active bogus > > 0xcf700000/0xf000100000 BIOS uncacheable set-by-firmware active bogus > > 0x100000000/0xf020000000 BIOS write-back set-by-firmware active bogus > > 0x120000000/0xf008000000 BIOS write-back set-by-firmware active bogus > > Worried that it says "bogus"? No, not really. This is, as I said earlier, > the result of an issue in the amd64 machdep.c code for handling MTRRs -- > it was written for the original amd64 where the "size" field of the MTRR > was a certain width. On Core 2 Duo these fields are 4 bits shorter, so > the machdep.c code looks at 4 more bits from that register than it should and > so all the size fields have that leading "f" digit. This causes the sizes > to no longer be a power of two, which causes machdep.c to set the "bogus" > flag because those entries look funny. The "bogus" flag being set doesn't > seem to actually break anything, and as near as I can figure if you change > the memcontrol entries the correct data gets written back to the registers > even on Core2Duo, so the "bogus" warnings seem to be pretty harmless. Ahh, I will look at fixing this. -- John BaldwinReceived on Wed Jan 30 2008 - 13:22:59 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:26 UTC