From: Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com>
To: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@amd.com>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Michal Pecio <michal.pecio@gmail.com>,
Eric DeVolder <eric.devolder@oracle.com>,
Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/acpi/boot: Correct acpi_is_processor_usable() check again
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2025 08:23:58 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251114162358.GA31707@ranerica-svr.sc.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251111145357.4031846-1-yazen.ghannam@amd.com>
On Tue, Nov 11, 2025 at 02:53:57PM +0000, Yazen Ghannam wrote:
> ACPI v6.3 defined a new "Online Capable" MADT LAPIC flag. This bit is
> used in conjunction with the "Enabled" MADT LAPIC flag to determine if a
> CPU can be enabled/hotplugged by the OS after boot.
>
> Before the new bit was defined, the "Enabled" bit was explicitly
> described like this (ACPI v6.0 wording provided):
> "If zero, this processor is unusable, and the operating system
> support will not attempt to use it"
>
> This means that CPU hotplug (based on MADT) is not possible. Many BIOS
> implementations follow this guidance. They may include LAPIC entries in
> MADT for unavailable CPUs, but since these entries are marked with
> "Enabled=0" it is expected that the OS will completely ignore these
> entries.
>
> However, QEMU will do the same (include entries with "Enabled=0") for
> the purpose of allowing CPU hotplug within the guest.
>
> Comment from QEMU function pc_madt_cpu_entry():
> /* ACPI spec says that LAPIC entry for non present
> * CPU may be omitted from MADT or it must be marked
> * as disabled. However omitting non present CPU from
> * MADT breaks hotplug on linux. So possible CPUs
> * should be put in MADT but kept disabled.
> */
>
> Recent Linux topology changes broke the QEMU use case. A following fix
> for the QEMU use case broke bare metal topology enumeration.
>
> Rework the Linux MADT LAPIC flags check to allow the QEMU use case only
> for guests and to maintain the ACPI spec behavior for bare metal.
>
> Remove an unnecessary check added to fix a bare metal case introduced by
> the QEMU "fix".
>
> Fixes: fed8d8773b8e ("x86/acpi/boot: Correct acpi_is_processor_usable() check")
> Fixes: f0551af02130 ("x86/topology: Ignore non-present APIC IDs in a present package")
> Reported-by: Michal Pecio <michal.pecio@gmail.com>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20251024204658.3da9bf3f.michal.pecio@gmail.com
> Signed-off-by: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@amd.com>
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: Eric DeVolder <eric.devolder@oracle.com>
> Cc: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@amd.com>
> ---
>
> Notes:
> Link:
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20251024204658.3da9bf3f.michal.pecio@gmail.com
>
> Hi all,
>
> This patch came out of the discussion above.
>
> A number of folks (myself included) understood the ACPI MADT LAPIC
> "Enabled" flag to be potentially used for CPU hotplug. This is
> explicitly false based on the wording in older revisions of the ACPI
> spec.
>
> However, this understanding is used for QEMU. Hence we need a check to
> differentiate the virtualization and bare metal use cases.
>
> Thanks,
> Yazen
Tested-by: Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com>
I tested this on a 4-socket Cascade Lake server with a BIOS based on ACPI 6.1.
All the lAPIC structures had the Enable bit set. It booted successfully.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-14 16:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-11 14:53 Yazen Ghannam
2025-11-12 13:56 ` Borislav Petkov
2025-11-12 16:35 ` Mario Limonciello
2025-11-12 17:21 ` Borislav Petkov
2025-11-13 14:27 ` Borislav Petkov
2025-11-13 14:30 ` Mario Limonciello
2025-11-13 14:34 ` Borislav Petkov
2025-11-13 14:55 ` Mario Limonciello
2025-11-12 18:05 ` Michal Pecio
2025-11-12 19:17 ` Borislav Petkov
2025-11-14 16:23 ` Ricardo Neri [this message]
2025-11-14 16:53 ` Borislav Petkov
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=20251114162358.GA31707@ranerica-svr.sc.intel.com \
--to=ricardo.neri-calderon@linux.intel.com \
--cc=eric.devolder@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mario.limonciello@amd.com \
--cc=michal.pecio@gmail.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=yazen.ghannam@amd.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®