From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
To: discuss@x86-64.org
Cc: "Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org
Subject: Re: [discuss] [Patch 1/2] x86, x86_64: Intel HT, Multi core detection fixes
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 23:49:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200510122349.05312.ak@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20051012143641.B29292@unix-os.sc.intel.com>
On Wednesday 12 October 2005 23:36, Siddha, Suresh B wrote:
> Fields obtained through cpuid vector 0x1(ebx[16:23]) and
> vector 0x4(eax[14:25], eax[26:31]) indicate the maximum values and might not
> always be the same as what is available and what OS sees. So make sure
> "siblings" and "cpu cores" values in /proc/cpuinfo reflect the values as seen
> by OS instead of what cpuid instruction says. This will also fix the buggy BIOS
> cases (for example where cpuid on a single core cpu says there are "2" siblings,
> even when HT is disabled in the BIOS.
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4359)
I'm not too fond of this new booted_core variable. How about
you just put the true number of cores into x86_num_cores?
What should x86_num_cores be in your setup anyways if not
"booted cores"?
Also I must admit the number of different variables to keep
track of multicore and siblingness starts to become mindboggling,
so I would recommend you add a fat overview comment somewhere
that describes their definition and relationship. Or better put
something into Documentation, it is probably as confusing for
user space /proc/cpuinfo consumer too.
-Andi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-10-12 21:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-10-05 23:17 [Patch] x86, x86_64: Intel HT, Multi core detection code cleanup Siddha, Suresh B
2005-10-06 10:42 ` Andi Kleen
2005-10-07 2:20 ` Siddha, Suresh B
2005-10-07 9:52 ` [discuss] " Andi Kleen
2005-10-08 0:52 ` Siddha, Suresh B
2005-10-08 10:28 ` Andi Kleen
2005-10-12 21:30 ` Siddha, Suresh B
2005-10-12 21:36 ` [Patch 1/2] x86, x86_64: Intel HT, Multi core detection fixes Siddha, Suresh B
2005-10-12 21:49 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2005-10-12 22:19 ` [discuss] " Siddha, Suresh B
2005-10-13 0:10 ` Andi Kleen
2005-10-13 21:55 ` Siddha, Suresh B
2005-10-13 21:59 ` [Patch 2/2] x86, x86_64: fix Intel cache detection code assumption about threads sharing Siddha, Suresh B
2005-10-12 21:41 ` Siddha, Suresh B
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200510122349.05312.ak@suse.de \
--to=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=discuss@x86-64.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=suresh.b.siddha@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome