http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
Summary: Add AMD Phenom detection to winecfg Product: Wine Version: 0.9.50. Platform: Other OS/Version: other Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Component: wine-kernel AssignedTo: wine-bugs@winehq.org ReportedBy: mdjenkins@comcast.net
Created an attachment (id=9584) --> (http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=9584) cat /proc/cpuinfo
Distro: Gentoo Kernel: Gentoo-sources 2.6.23-r3 CPU: AMD Phenom 9600 (/proc/cpuinfo attached)
$ winecfg fixme:reg:GetSystemInfo unknown cpu family '16', please report ! (-> setting to 386)
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
Michael Jenkins mdjenkins@comcast.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Severity|enhancement |normal OS/Version|other |Linux Platform|Other |PC-x86-64
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
Vitaliy Margolen vitaliy@kievinfo.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Severity|normal |minor
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
--- Comment #1 from Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes alex@thehandofagony.com 2007-12-10 05:43:26 --- Created an attachment (id=9585) --> (http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=9585) proposed patch
Does the following patch work?
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes alex@thehandofagony.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |alex@thehandofagony.com
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
--- Comment #2 from Michael Jenkins mdjenkins@comcast.net 2007-12-10 17:57:52 --- Thank you. I'll test the patch later tonight.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
Michael Jenkins mdjenkins@comcast.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution| |WORKSFORME
--- Comment #3 from Michael Jenkins mdjenkins@comcast.net 2007-12-11 01:05:33 --- patch applied, built and installed cleanly No more unknown cpu errors Thanks again
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
Dmitry Timoshkov dmitry@codeweavers.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |UNCONFIRMED Resolution|WORKSFORME |
--- Comment #4 from Dmitry Timoshkov dmitry@codeweavers.com 2007-12-11 01:17:36 --- The bug can be closed only once it's fixed in the official Wine tree.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
Bernd Buschinski b.buschinski@web.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |b.buschinski@web.de
--- Comment #5 from Bernd Buschinski b.buschinski@web.de 2008-02-04 11:29:03 --- was it already send to wine-patches? I cant find it on the list. If not can you please send it? :) its not in current git
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
--- Comment #6 from Mikolaj Zalewski mikolaj.zalewski@gmail.com 2008-03-14 11:48:48 --- Created an attachment (id=11378) --> (http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=11378) test program
The patch was sent to wine-patches but was not accepted to Wine Git. We should check if the values are correct. Could someone with a Phenom run the Project1.exe from the attached archive and tell us the results?
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
--- Comment #7 from Bernd Buschinski b.buschinski@web.de 2008-03-14 13:52:32 --- OEM id: 0 Arch: 0 Reserved: 0 #procs: 4 ActiveMsk: 15 ProcType: 586 ProcLevel: 5 ProcRev: 514
with unpatched wine and a AMD Phenom(tm) 9600 Quad-Core Processor
or should I run it with patched wine? (todays git)
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
Mikolaj Zalewski mikolaj.zalewski@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mikolaj.zalewski@gmail.com
--- Comment #8 from Mikolaj Zalewski mikolaj.zalewski@gmail.com 2008-03-14 17:18:08 --- Sorry, I didn't write it. You were supposed to run it on Windows. We want to know what values Windows returns.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
--- Comment #9 from Bernd Buschinski b.buschinski@web.de 2008-03-15 05:19:12 --- on winxp sp2 OEM id: 0 Arch: 0 Reserved: 0 #procs: 4 ActiveMsk: 15 ProcType: 586 ProcLevel: 16 ProcRev: 514
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
--- Comment #10 from Mikolaj Zalewski mikolaj.zalewski@gmail.com 2008-03-15 07:50:10 --- This explains why this patch wasn't accepted - the dwProcessorType should be PROCESSOR_INTEL_PENTIUM, not PROCESSOR_AMD_X8664 (the latter is probably returned to 64-bit programs running under a 64-bit OS).
Also while reading this code I find it quite strange that for Pentium 4 we return wProcessorLevel 6. Is there someone with a Pentium 4 reading this bug that could run the test program on it (under Windows).
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes alex@thehandofagony.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #11 from Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes alex@thehandofagony.com 2008-03-15 08:10:58 --- Yes, I can do that. I can also test a Pentium M and possibly get my hands on an AMD Sempron machine.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
--- Comment #12 from Mikolaj Zalewski mikolaj.zalewski@gmail.com 2008-03-15 13:41:50 --- I'd expect that the wProcessorLevel should be the same as the "cpu family" line in /proc/cpuinfo. For Pentium 4 with the current code it isn't so it would be good to check it (especially that for my Athlon 64 that has also a cpu family of 15 the wProcessorLevel should be 15 so the current code produces a wrong result). Of course it would be also nice to test it on more architectures (I've just checked that on a Core 2 it's the same).
If you test it on a Sempron you should also tell us if this Sempron is a cut-down version of Athlon XP or Athlon 64 (or provide also the /proc/cpuinfo from Linux).
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
--- Comment #13 from Lei Zhang thestig@google.com 2008-03-15 19:46:30 --- Might be good to check against the list and figure out what you have:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AMD_Sempron_microprocessors
processor names are a horrible mess. :-\
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
Darren Gipson enema0007@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |enema0007@gmail.com
--- Comment #14 from Darren Gipson enema0007@gmail.com 2008-03-16 06:58:36 --- (In reply to comment #1)
Created an attachment (id=9585)
--> (http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=9585) [details]
proposed patch
Does the following patch work?
How do i install this?
Im new linux and could not see a topic in the documentation that i found on how to install it.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
--- Comment #15 from Mikolaj Zalewski mikolaj.zalewski@gmail.com 2008-03-16 17:41:30 ---
How do i install this?
You can safly ignore the warning and wait until it is fixed in official Wine. If you really want to apply it you should build Wine from sources and do a 'patch -p1 <file.patch' from the main source directory before building it.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
--- Comment #16 from Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes alex@thehandofagony.com 2008-03-17 16:57:43 --- Created an attachment (id=11460) --> (http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=11460) Pentium 4 info from XP & Linux
The 'cpu family' is the same as ProcType for a Pentium 4, too.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
--- Comment #17 from Mikolaj Zalewski mikolaj.zalewski@gmail.com 2008-03-18 12:55:47 --- Thus the correct implementation should do atoi(value) (that way we don't need the switch and there will be no need to patch it again when AMD or Intel releases another processor). The dwProcessorType should be INTEL_PROCESSOR_PENTIUM with an exception for dwProcessorLevel of 3 and 4. Alexander, do you want to code it or should I do it when I will have some time?
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
--- Comment #18 from Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes alex@thehandofagony.com 2008-03-24 10:22:11 --- I can do it. Thanks for the help!
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
soxs schuster.bernhard@googlemail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |schuster.bernhard@googlemail | |.com
--- Comment #19 from soxs schuster.bernhard@googlemail.com 2008-03-28 16:22:35 --- How far are you with coding? I would like to see this as soon as possible. :-P just got a new phenom
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
Goten Xiao gotenxiao@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |gotenxiao@gmail.com
--- Comment #20 from Goten Xiao gotenxiao@gmail.com 2008-03-28 16:28:06 --- So did I. Going to apply the patch and compile Wine so I get interim function, but I'd like to see this implemented before 0.9.60 if at all possible :)
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
--- Comment #21 from Michael Jenkins mdjenkins@comcast.net 2008-03-29 12:35:25 --- Created an attachment (id=11728) --> (http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=11728) interim patch
cachedsi.dwProcessorType value updated
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
--- Comment #22 from Michael Jenkins mdjenkins@comcast.net 2008-03-29 12:36:25 --- First off I'd like to thank Alexander for the interim bug fix and the rewrite he is working on to keep this from cropping up again, I'd like to offer you a beer for your time. Also Thanks to Dmitry for fixing my mistake of trying to close this bug early. It's my first bug report.
While we're waiting for the rewrite though, shouldn't the interim patch be updated on line 11 to read 'cachedsi.dwProcessorType = PROCESSOR_INTEL_PENTIUM;' instead of 'cachedsi.dwProcessorType = PROCESSOR_AMD_X8664' based on the note from Mikolaj?
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
--- Comment #23 from soxs schuster.bernhard@googlemail.com 2008-03-29 13:43:53 --- I applied the patch with patch -Np1 < /patch/filename && tools/make_requests and got through make depend && make but checkinstall fails everytime. I am running on 64bit and yes, I allready read the wineon64bithowto. So I can not really test it which version of the patch works... any ideas? The last error Msg is: fakeroot dpkg-buildpackage dpkg-buildpackage: set CPPFLAGS to default value: dpkg-buildpackage: set CFLAGS to default value: -g -O2 dpkg-buildpackage: set CXXFLAGS to default value: -g -O2 dpkg-buildpackage: set FFLAGS to default value: -g -O2 dpkg-buildpackage: set LDFLAGS to default value: -Wl,-Bsymbolic-functions tail: „debian/changelog“ can not be opend to read access: No such file or directory dpkg-buildpackage: Error (or similar): tail of debian/changelog gave Error-Exitstatus 1
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
--- Comment #24 from soxs schuster.bernhard@googlemail.com 2008-03-29 13:51:55 --- trying to do it with checkinstall gives me: ../tools/mkinstalldirs -m 755 /usr/local/include/wine/windows/ddk mkdir /usr/local/include/wine chmod 755 /usr/local/include/wine chmod: While setting access rights for „/usr/local/include/wine“: No such file or directory make[1]: *** [/usr/local/include/wine/windows/ddk] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving Directory '/home/bernhard/Desktop/w/wine-0.9.58/include' make: *** [include/__install__] Error 2
I am trying to compile it on phenom 9500..
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
--- Comment #25 from Michael Jenkins mdjenkins@comcast.net 2008-03-29 14:55:32 --- sox, have you tried running just 'make install' to verify it's not an issue with checkinstall?
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
--- Comment #26 from soxs schuster.bernhard@googlemail.com 2008-03-29 14:56:57 --- no, sry, did not do it so far
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
--- Comment #27 from soxs schuster.bernhard@googlemail.com 2008-03-29 15:01:47 --- make install worked, at least it did not return any error but I must say, that the second patch does not work, at least not for me. I did not test the first one.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
--- Comment #28 from Michael Jenkins mdjenkins@comcast.net 2008-03-29 15:50:37 --- (In reply to comment #27)
make install worked, at least it did not return any error but I must say, that the second patch does not work, at least not for me. I did not test the first one.
both patches work for me. I moved the patch to the top directory of the wine source and ran `patch -p1 < /path_to_wine_source_directory/patch_filename`.
The difference between the two patches is the value set for dwProcessorType. I only modified the first patch Alexander provided so this value would be set to PROCESSOR_INTEL_PENTIUM instead of PROCESSOR_AMD_X8664 based on the information provided by Mikolaj.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
--- Comment #29 from soxs schuster.bernhard@googlemail.com 2008-03-30 06:20:23 --- dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot worked to compile wine with patch #2 and it does not give me any errors about undsupported cpu type.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes alex@thehandofagony.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #9585 is|0 |1 obsolete| |
--- Comment #30 from Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes alex@thehandofagony.com 2008-03-30 08:24:48 --- Created an attachment (id=11739) --> (http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=11739) Updated patch
This patch was sent to wine-patches.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
Michael Jenkins mdjenkins@comcast.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #11728|0 |1 is obsolete| |
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
--- Comment #31 from Michael Jenkins mdjenkins@comcast.net 2008-03-30 09:54:41 --- (In reply to comment #30)
Created an attachment (id=11739)
--> (http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=11739) [details]
Updated patch
This patch was sent to wine-patches.
Thanks, it patched, built and installed clean for me.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
--- Comment #32 from soxs schuster.bernhard@googlemail.com 2008-03-30 12:14:40 --- Latest patch works for me aswell fine, no more errors regarding unknown cpu familiy. Thx a lot!
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
Armin Schuster armin.schuster@googlemail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |armin.schuster@googlemail.co | |m
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes alex@thehandofagony.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED
--- Comment #33 from Alexander Nicolaysen Sørnes alex@thehandofagony.com 2008-03-31 09:20:13 --- Patch applied.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10742
Alexandre Julliard julliard@winehq.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |CLOSED
--- Comment #34 from Alexandre Julliard julliard@winehq.org 2008-04-04 10:07:06 --- Closing bugs fixed in 0.9.59.