From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755760AbYCaC3s (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Mar 2008 22:29:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751446AbYCaC3l (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Mar 2008 22:29:41 -0400 Received: from rv-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.198.184]:28874 "EHLO rv-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750995AbYCaC3k (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Mar 2008 22:29:40 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=lZ7Ev7Zpkb9tM9O8Oocr1lEVbGump59B0GgcKk958jfYRQxwBVALe2MOWYOLpH864u5BOZejvlEuoD8za1fCOaQvlzenrwSW34JLkKnxRPTplIedDTEndg99a17A0E7/lZ0mHZkJZMJ7KgmcqTI/najil0Cbtv93dkY0tCnIDyc= Message-ID: <86802c440803301929k971c7a4m5f72aca1feca66c1@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 19:29:40 -0700 From: "Yinghai Lu" To: "Jack Steiner" Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] x86_64: Support for new UV apic Cc: "Andi Kleen" , mingo@elte.hu, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20080331022627.GE20619@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20080328191216.GA16455@sgi.com> <86802c440803301622j2874ca56t51b52a54920a233b@mail.gmail.com> <86802c440803301833r2229900cw99129515822dc373@mail.gmail.com> <20080331021224.GB20619@sgi.com> <86802c440803301923m29b6a0coca7f61975331cbe5@mail.gmail.com> <20080331022627.GE20619@sgi.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 7:26 PM, Jack Steiner wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 07:23:07PM -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 7:12 PM, Jack Steiner wrote: > > > > > Did you test it on non UV_X2APIC box? > > > > > > > > anyway the read_apic_id is totally wrong, even for your UV_X2APIC box. > > > > because id=apic_read(APIC_ID) will have apic_id at bits [31,24], and > > > > id |= __get_cpu_var(x2apic_extra_bits) is assuming that is on bits [5,0] > > > > > > > > so you even didn't test in your UV_X2APIC box! > > > > > > > > > > It works fine on UV_X2APIX boxes because the double shift does > > > not occur. However, support for UV_X2APIC is dependent on > > > x2apic code that is not yet in the tree. Once the APIC > > > is switched into x2apic mode, the apicid is located in the LOW > > > bits of the apicid register, not the HIGH bits. > > > > oh, so that will need have new version GET_APIC_ID too. > > Yes, although I think all the changes will be unified into > one non-inline function that is a combination of > GET_APIC_ID() & read_apic_id(). it seems x2apic patch should be applied before uv patch... YH