Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [jgardou] 50991: [NTOSKRNL] - Print supported CPU features. - Simplify detection of non working but claimed SYSENTER support for intel processors - Workaround a virtualbox "feature" : claim that SY...

[Timo Kreuzer]

Am 07.03.2011 14:33, schrieb jgardou(a)svn.reactos.org:
>   Author: jgardou
>  Date: Mon Mar  7 13:33:10 2011
>  New Revision: 50991
>  ...
>  +                Reg[3] |= 0x800;
>  ...
>  +            if ((Reg[0]&  0x0FFF3FFF)<  0x00000633) 
I'd prefer symbolic
constants over these magic numbers.

>   +
>  +    DPRINT1("Supported CPU features :\n");
>  +#define print_supported(kf_value) \
>  +    if(FeatureBits&  kf_value) DPRINT1("\t" #kf_value "\n")
>  +    print_supported(KF_V86_VIS);
>  +    print_supported(KF_RDTSC);
>  +    print_supported(KF_CR4);
>  +    print_supported(KF_CMOV);
>  +    print_supported(KF_GLOBAL_PAGE);
>  +    print_supported(KF_LARGE_PAGE);
>  +    print_supported(KF_MTRR);
>  +    print_supported(KF_CMPXCHG8B);
>  +    print_supported(KF_MMX);
>  +    print_supported(KF_WORKING_PTE);
>  +    print_supported(KF_PAT);
>  +    print_supported(KF_FXSR);
>  +    print_supported(KF_FAST_SYSCALL);
>  +    print_supported(KF_XMMI);
>  +    print_supported(KF_3DNOW);
>  +    print_supported(KF_AMDK6MTRR);
>  +    print_supported(KF_XMMI64);
>  +    print_supported(KF_DTS);
>  +    print_supported(KF_NX_BIT);
>  +    print_supported(KF_NX_DISABLED);
>  +    print_supported(KF_NX_ENABLED);
>  +#undef print_supported 
Can we make this more compact please? Like "Supported
CPU features: 
V86_VIS, RDTSC ..."

Thanks,
Timo

[Olaf Siejka]

The result:

(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:485) Supported CPU features :
(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:488) KF_V86_VIS(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:489)
KF_RDTSC(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:490) KF_CR4(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:491)
KF_CMOV(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:492)
KF_GLOBAL_PAGE(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:493)
KF_LARGE_PAGE(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:494)
KF_MTRR(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:495) KF_CMPXCHG8B(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:496)
KF_MMX(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:497)
KF_WORKING_PTE(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:498)
KF_PAT(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:499) KF_FXSR(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:500)
KF_FAST_SYSCALL(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:501)
KF_XMMI(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:504) KF_XMMI64(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:506)
KF_NX_BIT(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:510)
(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:816) Prefetch Cache: 64 bytes L2 Cache: 0 bytes L2
Cache Line: 64 bytes L2 Cache Associativity: 0

is not what i would call compact. Can we have something like:

(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:485) Supported CPU features : KF_V86_VIS, KF_RDTSC,
KF_CR4. KF_CMOV, KF_GLOBAL_PAGE, KF_LARGE_PAGE, KF_MTRR, KF_CMPXCHG8B,
KF_MMX, KF_WORKING_PTE, KF_PAT, KF_FXSR, KF_FAST_SYSCALL, KF_XMMI,
KF_XMMI64, KF_NX_BIT

instead?

Also it seems that L2 cache size detection is broken on my builbot's CPU:
(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:816) Prefetch Cache: 64 bytes L2 Cache: 0 bytes L2
Cache Line: 64 bytes L2 Cache Associativity: 0

Regards

2011/3/7 Timo Kreuzer <timo.kreuzer(a)web.de>

>   Am 07.03.2011 14:33, schrieb jgardou(a)svn.reactos.org:
>
> >   Author: jgardou
> >  Date: Mon Mar  7 13:33:10 2011
> >  New Revision: 50991
> >  ...
> >  +                Reg[3] |= 0x800;
> >  ...
> >  +            if ((Reg[0]&  0x0FFF3FFF)<  0x00000633)
> >  
>  I'd prefer symbolic constants over these magic numbers.
>
>   +
> >   +    DPRINT1("Supported CPU features
> > :\n");
> >  +#define print_supported(kf_value) \
> >  +    if(FeatureBits&  kf_value) DPRINT1("\t" #kf_value "\n")
> >  +    print_supported(KF_V86_VIS);
> >  +    print_supported(KF_RDTSC);
> >  +    print_supported(KF_CR4);
> >  +    print_supported(KF_CMOV);
> >  +    print_supported(KF_GLOBAL_PAGE);
> >  +    print_supported(KF_LARGE_PAGE);
> >  +    print_supported(KF_MTRR);
> >  +    print_supported(KF_CMPXCHG8B);
> >  +    print_supported(KF_MMX);
> >  +    print_supported(KF_WORKING_PTE);
> >  +    print_supported(KF_PAT);
> >  +    print_supported(KF_FXSR);
> >  +    print_supported(KF_FAST_SYSCALL);
> >  +    print_supported(KF_XMMI);
> >  +    print_supported(KF_3DNOW);
> >  +    print_supported(KF_AMDK6MTRR);
> >  +    print_supported(KF_XMMI64);
> >  +    print_supported(KF_DTS);
> >  +    print_supported(KF_NX_BIT);
> >  +    print_supported(KF_NX_DISABLED);
> >  +    print_supported(KF_NX_ENABLED);
> >  +#undef print_supported
> >  
>  Can we make this more compact please? Like "Supported CPU features:
>  V86_VIS, RDTSC ..."
>
>  Thanks,
>  Timo
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Ros-dev mailing list
>  Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
>  http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev

[Samuel serapion]

Try DbgPrint or OutputDebugString ;)
On Mar 7, 2011 4:09 PM, "Olaf Siejka" <caemyr(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>  
>  The result:
>
>  (ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:485) Supported CPU features :
>  (ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:488) KF_V86_VIS(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:489)
KF_RDTSC(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:490) KF_CR4(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:491)
KF_CMOV(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:492)
KF_GLOBAL_PAGE(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:493)
KF_LARGE_PAGE(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:494)
KF_MTRR(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:495) KF_CMPXCHG8B(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:496)
KF_MMX(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:497)
KF_WORKING_PTE(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:498)
KF_PAT(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:499) KF_FXSR(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:500)
KF_FAST_SYSCALL(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:501)
KF_XMMI(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:504) KF_XMMI64(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:506)
KF_NX_BIT(ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:510)
>   (ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:816) Prefetch Cache: 64 bytes
> L2 Cache: 0 bytes L2 
Cache Line: 64 bytes L2 Cache Associativity: 0
>  
>  is not what i would call compact. Can we have something like:
>
>  (ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:485) Supported CPU features : KF_V86_VIS, 
KF_RDTSC, KF_CR4.
KF_CMOV, KF_GLOBAL_PAGE, KF_LARGE_PAGE, KF_MTRR,
KF_CMPXCHG8B, KF_MMX, KF_WORKING_PTE, KF_PAT, KF_FXSR, KF_FAST_SYSCALL,
KF_XMMI, KF_XMMI64, KF_NX_BIT
>
> instead?
>
> Also it seems that L2 cache size detection is broken on my builbot's CPU:
>   (ntoskrnl\ke\i386\cpu.c:816) Prefetch Cache: 64 bytes
> L2 Cache: 0 bytes L2 
Cache Line: 64 bytes L2 Cache Associativity: 0
>  
>  Regards
>
>  2011/3/7 Timo Kreuzer <timo.kreuzer(a)web.de>
>
> > Am 07.03.2011 14:33, schrieb jgardou(a)svn.reactos.org:
> >>
> >> Author: jgardou
> >> Date: Mon Mar  7 13:33:10 2011
> >> New Revision: 50991
> >> ...
> >> +                Reg[3] |= 0x800;
> >> ...
> >> +            if ((Reg[0]&  0x0FFF3FFF)<  0x00000633)
> >
> > I'd prefer symbolic constants over these magic numbers.
> >
> >> +
> >> +    DPRINT1("Supported CPU features :\n");
> >> +#define print_supported(kf_value) \
> >> +    if(FeatureBits&  kf_value) DPRINT1("\t" #kf_value
> "\n")
> >> +    print_supported(KF_V86_VIS);
> >> +    print_supported(KF_RDTSC);
> >> +    print_supported(KF_CR4);
> >> +    print_supported(KF_CMOV);
> >> +    print_supported(KF_GLOBAL_PAGE);
> >> +    print_supported(KF_LARGE_PAGE);
> >> +    print_supported(KF_MTRR);
> >> +    print_supported(KF_CMPXCHG8B);
> >> +    print_supported(KF_MMX);
> >> +    print_supported(KF_WORKING_PTE);
> >> +    print_supported(KF_PAT);
> >> +    print_supported(KF_FXSR);
> >> +    print_supported(KF_FAST_SYSCALL);
> >> +    print_supported(KF_XMMI);
> >> +    print_supported(KF_3DNOW);
> >> +    print_supported(KF_AMDK6MTRR);
> >> +    print_supported(KF_XMMI64);
> >> +    print_supported(KF_DTS);
> >> +    print_supported(KF_NX_BIT);
> >> +    print_supported(KF_NX_DISABLED);
> >> +    print_supported(KF_NX_ENABLED);
> >> +#undef print_supported
> >
> > Can we make this more compact please? Like "Supported CPU features:
V86_VIS, RDTSC ..."
> >  
> >  Thanks,
> >  Timo
> >
> >
> >  _______________________________________________
> >  Ros-dev mailing list
> >  Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
> >  http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev 
>
>
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Ros-dev mailing list
>  Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
>  http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev