On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 02:21:00PM -0400, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
> When comparing 'model name' fields in /proc/cpuinfo it was noticed that
> a simple test comparing the model name fields was failing. After some
> simple investigation it was noticed that, in fact, the model name fields
> are different for each processor. Processor 0's model name field had
> white space removed, while the other processors did not.
>
> Another way of seeing this behaviour is to convert spaces into underscores
> in the output of /proc/cpuinfo,
>
> [thetango@prarit ~]# grep "^model name" /proc/cpuinfo | uniq -c | sed 's/\
> /_/g'
> ______1_model_name :_AMD_Opteron(TM)_Processor_6272
> _____63_model_name :_AMD_Opteron(TM)_Processor_6272_________________
>
> which shows two different model name fields even though they should be the
> same.
>
> This occurs because the kernel calls strim() on cpu 0's x86_model_id field
I'd actually prefer this much simpler patch:
---
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/proc.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/proc.c
index e7d8c7608471..d215e9b26567 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/proc.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/proc.c
@@ -67,7 +67,7 @@ static int show_cpuinfo(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
c->x86_vendor_id[0] ? c->x86_vendor_id : "unknown",
c->x86,
c->x86_model,
- c->x86_model_id[0] ? c->x86_model_id : "unknown");
+ c->x86_model_id[0] ? strim(c->x86_model_id) : "unknown");
if (c->x86_mask || c->cpuid_level >= 0)
seq_printf(m, "stepping\t: %d\n", c->x86_mask);
---
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
