> It is very likely that the latest microcode sets the chicken bits for the > known erratas already. AFAIK, this is the best that a ucode update > can typically do anyway. >I just did some testing - it does do these bits: cpucontrol -m '0xc0011029|=0x2000' $x cpucontrol -m '0xc0011020|=0x10' $x but it does not do these bits: cpucontrol -m '0xc0011028|=0x10' $x cpucontrol -m '0xc0011020|=0x200000000000000' $x (though someone else might want to doubel check that as I may have miscounted the bits!) am going to trey your patch today -pete.
Konstantin Belousov
2018-Jul-03 10:09 UTC
Ryzen issues on FreeBSD ? (with sort of workaround)
On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 10:27:06AM +0100, Pete French wrote:> > > It is very likely that the latest microcode sets the chicken bits for the > > known erratas already. AFAIK, this is the best that a ucode update > > can typically do anyway. > > > > I just did some testing - it does do these bits:By 'it' you mean the microcode update/BIOS on your board ?> > > cpucontrol -m '0xc0011029|=0x2000' $x > cpucontrol -m '0xc0011020|=0x10' $x > > but it does not do these bits: > > cpucontrol -m '0xc0011028|=0x10' $x > cpucontrol -m '0xc0011020|=0x200000000000000' $x > > (though someone else might want to doubel check that as I may have > miscounted the bits!) > > am going to trey your patch today > > -pete.