From: Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com>
To: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@elte.hu,
linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:irq/numa] x86, apic: Fix dummy apic read operation together with broken MP handling
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 15:59:28 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <86802c440906071559t7f2139c0s55fd15e8cd669cff@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090607203951.GF4547@lenovo>
On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Cyrill Gorcunov<gorcunov@gmail.com> wrote:
> [Yinghai Lu - Sun, Jun 07, 2009 at 12:23:47PM -0700]
> ...
> | > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
> | > index d2e8de9..7c80007 100644
> | > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
> | > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
> | > @@ -992,10 +992,12 @@ static int __init smp_sanity_check(unsigned max_cpus)
> | > */
> | > if (APIC_INTEGRATED(apic_version[boot_cpu_physical_apicid]) &&
> | > !cpu_has_apic) {
> | > - printk(KERN_ERR "BIOS bug, local APIC #%d not detected!...\n",
> | > - boot_cpu_physical_apicid);
> | > - printk(KERN_ERR "... forcing use of dummy APIC emulation."
> | > + if (!disable_apic) {
> | > + pr_err("BIOS bug, local APIC #%d not detected!...\n",
> | > + boot_cpu_physical_apicid);
> | > + pr_err("... forcing use of dummy APIC emulation."
> | > "(tell your hw vendor)\n");
> | > + }
> |
> | It seems we don't need this check here.
> | when we have disable_apic, cpu_has_apic is cleared forcely.
> |
> | YH
> |
>
> No Yinghai, it's needed. The check is for !disable_apic
> and if we really has a BIOS bug we should report about
> it _only_ in case if it's a bios bug not apic being
> disabled via boot line. I could be missing something
> of course. Rechecking...
>
> Ah, I remember the scenario I've kept in mind while
> was cooking the patch.
>
> 1) MP apic entry is broken.
> 2) apic was disabled via boot option.
> 3) kernel compiled with smp support.
>
> So we have the calls
>
> init_apic_mappings
> (due to boot option)
> apic_disable()
> (due to broken MP)
> apic_version[new_apicid] = 0
> smp_sanity_check
> if (APIC_INTEGRATED(apic_version[boot_cpu_physical_apicid]) &&
> !cpu_has_apic) {
> Stop! So APIC_INTEGRATED returns false now regargless of what
> really we have on HW level. Darn! Actually I was in idea
> this if() should be true so SMP support will be turned _off_.
in Ingo' case:
before that check
/*
* If we couldn't find an SMP configuration at boot time,
* get out of here now!
*/
if (!smp_found_config && !acpi_lapic) {
preempt_enable();
printk(KERN_NOTICE "SMP motherboard not detected.\n");
disable_smp();
if (APIC_init_uniprocessor())
printk(KERN_NOTICE "Local APIC not detected."
" Using dummy APIC emulation.\n");
return -1;
}
will get out earlier.
>
> Yinghai, I think we need to set apic_version[boot_cpu_physical_apicid]
> to 0xf0 in case if apic is disabled via cmdline option together with
> broken MP. Thoughts?
should be other case:
when MADT is right, but disablelapic is used.
will get cpu_has_apic == 0, and we are not using dummy apic read/write.
so don't need to check
/*
* If we couldn't find a local APIC, then get out of here now!
*/
if (APIC_INTEGRATED(apic_version[boot_cpu_physical_apicid]) &&
!cpu_has_apic) {
if (!disable_apic) {
pr_err("BIOS bug, local APIC #%d not detected!...\n",
boot_cpu_physical_apicid);
pr_err("... forcing use of dummy APIC emulation."
"(tell your hw vendor)\n");
}
smpboot_clear_io_apic();
arch_disable_smp_support();
return -1;
}
>
> To Ingo: this !disable_apic will be needed if Yinghai confirm
> that my idea is right. Meanwhile -- it's just an always-true
> cpu consuming operation. So should not be harming. But sorry
> anyway -- was thinking about one way but reached another.
YH
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-07 22:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-07 12:48 [PATCH -tip] x86: apic - fix " Cyrill Gorcunov
2009-06-07 14:24 ` [tip:irq/numa] x86, apic: Fix " tip-bot for Cyrill Gorcunov
2009-06-07 14:33 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2009-06-07 19:23 ` Yinghai Lu
2009-06-07 20:39 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2009-06-07 22:59 ` Yinghai Lu [this message]
2009-06-08 15:16 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2009-06-08 17:47 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
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=86802c440906071559t7f2139c0s55fd15e8cd669cff@mail.gmail.com \
--to=yhlu.kernel@gmail.com \
--cc=gorcunov@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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®