[PATCH] model_65x CPU support

[Keith Hui]

Attached patch moves support for Deschutes Slot 1 CPUs (model_65x)
into its own home.

This is similar to the Katmai patch I submitted before, but without
microcode this time. With 17 of them they will make the patch too
large. I think I'll defer them for later or someone else*, hehe. :D

abuild-tested. I have no Deschutes CPUs to boot test this with.

Signed-off-by: Keith Hui

* also because I like to keep all microcodes for the same family
within one file instead of one microcode per file.

[Peter Stuge]

Keith Hui wrote:
> Attached patch moves support for Deschutes Slot 1 CPUs (model_65x)
> into its own home.

Then I guess the patch should also delete some lines in existing
files?
> This is similar to the Katmai patch I submitted before, but without
> microcode this time. With 17 of them they will make the patch too
> large. I think I'll defer them for later or someone else*, hehe. :D
>
> abuild-tested.

It doesn't look like the new code is used anywhere? Should it be?
> also because I like to keep all microcodes for the same family
>
> within one file instead of one microcode per file.

We want microcode updates to be as close as possible to upstream
format. Eventually I think we want to put them verbatim into cbfs.

//Peter

[Stefan Reinauer]

On 10/15/10 9:04 PM, Peter Stuge wrote:
> > also because I like to keep all microcodes for the same family
> >
> > within one file instead of one microcode per file.
>
> We want microcode updates to be as close as possible to upstream
> format. Eventually I think we want to put them verbatim into cbfs.

Yes. Please use the microcode extraction script in our tree to put them
into the right places.

[Uwe Hermann]

On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 11:25:02PM -0400, Keith Hui wrote:
> Attached patch moves support for Deschutes Slot 1 CPUs (model_65x)
> into its own home.

Thanks, r5954.
> This is similar to the Katmai patch I submitted before, but without
> microcode this time. With 17 of them they will make the patch too
> large. I think I'll defer them for later or someone else*, hehe. :D

[...]
> also because I like to keep all microcodes for the same family
>
> within one file instead of one microcode per file.

As Stefan mentioned, we should always use the script from
src/cpu/intel/microcode/update-microcodes.sh
to create/update the microcode files.

We're leaving model_6xx untouched for now, as it is still being used at
the moment and duplicate CPUs in model_6xx and model_65x for example should
not matter I think. When the splitting is done, we'll probably get rid
of model_6xx entirely and have slot1/slot2/socket370 etc. include only
the proper families they need.

Uwe.