From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754816AbZHCMID (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Aug 2009 08:08:03 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754593AbZHCMIB (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Aug 2009 08:08:01 -0400 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:47055 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754293AbZHCMIA (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Aug 2009 08:08:00 -0400 Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 14:07:39 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Borislav Petkov , Andreas Herrmann Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" , Thomas Gleixner , Sachin Sant , Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, LKML , Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: Boot failure on x86_64 (OOPS set_cpu_sibling_map() ) Message-ID: <20090803120739.GA29156@elte.hu> References: <20090730182143.eadf36e6.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <4A718338.6050907@in.ibm.com> <20090730135623.GB16659@aftab> <20090803093144.GC9074@elte.hu> <20090803101401.GA14442@aftab> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090803101401.GA14442@aftab> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.5 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Borislav Petkov wrote: > Hi Ingo, > > On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 11:31:44AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > Borislav, this patch: > > > > From 4581c6313c16a38ffcef8bccd6ffbe9598d585b0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > > From: Andreas Herrmann > > Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 10:21:06 +0200 > > Subject: [PATCH] x86: provide CPU topology information for multi-node processors > > > > arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h | 2 ++ > > arch/x86/include/asm/smp.h | 6 ++++++ > > arch/x86/include/asm/topology.h | 2 ++ > > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c | 2 ++ > > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/proc.c | 1 + > > arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++---- > > 6 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > has absolutely _ZERO_ place in the EDAC tree. It was submitted to > > the x86 tree and was under discussion - i requested changes to it so > > this current form has my NAK. > > I know that, I'm following the discussion. I needed the > functionality in EDAC and that's why I added them _temporarily_ to > the mix so that the whole series (esp. the MCE bits) can see some > testing. Which obviously caught some issues :). > > But I'm very well aware that the patches are not final and they > will go through x86 when done. This is what I told Stephen when > upping them for linux-next. Next time please tell the x86 maintainers too ;-) The thing that was blocking this commit is really the insufficient sched-domains integration of said NUMA bits. I think the NUMA bits look good and if the EDAC tree makes use of it we can merge it in .32. Mind preparing a separate branch for it (.31-rc5 based) and send me a pull request so that we can share the commit between the EDAC tree and the x86 tree? Thanks, Ingo