Anyone feeling guilty? ;-)
Is it pre fam10h? It was always big mystery for me how it can work ;) The AP got the SAME stack... If you don't believe check for yourself. I think simple fix would be to do same thing as FAM10h code is doing.
Please can you try attached patch? Dunno if it works looks like it could. Thanks, Rudolf
Index: cache_as_ram.inc =================================================================== --- cache_as_ram.inc (revision 5666) +++ cache_as_ram.inc (working copy) @@ -290,14 +290,11 @@ andl $0x9fffffff, %eax movl %eax, %cr0 - jmp_if_k8(fam10_end_part1) - /* So we need to check if it is BSP */ movl $0x1b, %ecx rdmsr bt $8, %eax /*BSC */ - jnc CAR_FAM10_ap -fam10_end_part1: + jnc CAR_ap post_code(0xa2) @@ -319,8 +316,8 @@ post_code(0xa3) - jmp CAR_FAM10_ap_out -CAR_FAM10_ap: + jmp CAR_ap_out +CAR_ap: /* need to set stack pointer for AP */ /* it will be from CacheBase + (CacheSize - GlobalVarSize)/2 - (NodeID<<CoreIDbits + CoreID) * CacheSizeAPStack*/ /* So need to get the NodeID and CoreID at first */ @@ -361,7 +358,7 @@ post_code(0xa4) -CAR_FAM10_ap_out: +CAR_ap_out: post_code(0xa5)
-- coreboot mailing list: [email protected] http://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
