From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263875AbTHFOkH (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Aug 2003 10:40:07 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263894AbTHFOkG (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Aug 2003 10:40:06 -0400 Received: from meryl.it.uu.se ([130.238.12.42]:24526 "EHLO meryl.it.uu.se") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263875AbTHFOkC (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Aug 2003 10:40:02 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <16177.4928.365768.935653@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 16:40:00 +0200 From: Mikael Pettersson To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: 2.6.0-test2 on Dell PE2650, ACPI_HT_ONLY strangeness X-Mailer: VM 6.90 under Emacs 20.7.1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Before upgrading our PowerEdge 2650 (dual HT Xeons, Tigon3, aic7899, workspace on sw raid5 over 4 disks, ext3) to RH9, I gave 2.6.0-test2 a spin. Worked fine, except for one thing. In 2.4, CONFIG_SMP automatically uses acpitable.c to detect secondary threads via the MADT (since MPS doesn't handle them). In 2.6.0-test2, with CONFIG_SMP and CONFIG_ACPI_HT_ONLY, this doesn't happen, _unless_ I also pass acpismp=force on the command line. Without acpismp=force, it only finds two CPUs. The logic in arch/i386/kernel/setup.c, which defaults acpi to disabled if HT_ONLY is chosen, seems backwards. Surely if I configure HT_ONLY it's because I want to use it, no? /Mikael