On 11.01.2008 02:33, Corey Osgood wrote:
joe@smittys.pointclark.net wrote:
Quoting Corey Osgood corey.osgood@gmail.com:
Do you mean the microcode files? If so, the microcode update looks like this:
Header Update Revision Date Processor Signature (CPU ID) ...
So, the 4th entry in the update is always the CPU ID, and conveniently it's always the last one on the first line. It also makes grepping for them very easy, once you have the update broken down into smaller files. This is documented *somewhere* in LB, but I can't find it at the moment. It's also in the Intel architecture manual, volume 3a, table 9-6.
In the past we labeled some CPU IDs as to what CPUs they belonged to. In truth, Intel uses the same CPU IDs for a variety of CPUs, for instance in some cases Celeron, Pentium X, and Xeons all share a common ID, since the core is still the same. So we can't really do that any more ;)
Oh ok, that makes sense.
Acked-by: Joseph Smith joe@smittys.pointclark.net
Thanks, Joe. Anyone else have anything to say? Honestly expected more feedback, but if there are no objections I'll commit it tomorrow.
The other thing I forgot to mention was that all the data on CPU IDs came from the existing code and this site: http://processorfinder.intel.com. Some of them are a bit unclear on what sockets they use, but if anything comes up wrong, we can easily correct it.
Do you see any way to solve the "size problem" for sockets with too many different cores? It would also be interesting to find out if your work on stripping duplicate contents gives us new opportunities to reduce size even further.
Regards, Carl-Daniel