linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
To: Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	x86 <x86@kernel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	linux-pm <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] x86/apic: Reduce print level of CPU limit announcement
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 22:28:24 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0gmjLcG-Ho73QRdPm83noGNmJHGcnb9FTdYAFdGFv3gwQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190326183104.GL22899@mtr-leonro.mtl.com>

On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 7:31 PM Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 07:08:07PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 6:53 PM Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 05:30:22PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 4:32 PM Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 04:12:27PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > > > On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 3:41 PM Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 01:29:54PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 1:02 PM Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > From: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@mellanox.com>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Kernel is booted with less possible CPUs (possible_cpus kernel boot
> > > > > > > > > option) than available CPUs will have prints like this:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > [    1.131039] APIC: NR_CPUS/possible_cpus limit of 8 reached. Processor 55/0x1f ignored.
> > > > > > > > > [    1.132228] ACPI: Unable to map lapic to logical cpu number
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Those warnings are printed for every not-enabled CPU and on the systems
> > > > > > > > > with large number of such CPUs, we see a lot of those prints for default
> > > > > > > > > print level.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Simple conversion of those prints to be in debug level removes them
> > > > > > > > > while leaving the option to debug system.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > But generally dynamic debug must be enabled in order for pr_debug()
> > > > > > > > prints to be visible which is kind of cumbersome to do via the command
> > > > > > > > line.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It is doable and documented pretty well, which is uncommon :)
> > > > > > > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/admin-guide/dynamic-debug-howto.html#debug-messages-during-boot-process
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I know.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That's what I mean by "kind of cumbersome", because you need to know
> > > > > > which debug messages to enable upfront.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@mellanox.com>
> > > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > > >  arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c | 2 +-
> > > > > > > > >  arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c | 6 +++---
> > > > > > > > >  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> > > > > > > > > index 8dcbf6890714..3ef8ab89c02d 100644
> > > > > > > > > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> > > > > > > > > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> > > > > > > > > @@ -770,7 +770,7 @@ int acpi_map_cpu(acpi_handle handle, phys_cpuid_t physid, u32 acpi_id,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >         cpu = acpi_register_lapic(physid, acpi_id, ACPI_MADT_ENABLED);
> > > > > > > > >         if (cpu < 0) {
> > > > > > > > > -               pr_info(PREFIX "Unable to map lapic to logical cpu number\n");
> > > > > > > > > +               pr_debug(PREFIX "Unable to map lapic to logical cpu number\n");
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > And this one is printed sometimes when something really goes wrong
> > > > > > > > which may be really hard to debug otherwise, so there is value in the
> > > > > > > > info level here.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Would it be possible to avoid printing it just in some cases?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This can do the trick:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> > > > > > > index 3ef8ab89c02d..00212b3991e0 100644
> > > > > > > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> > > > > > > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
> > > > > > > @@ -770,7 +770,10 @@ int acpi_map_cpu(acpi_handle handle, phys_cpuid_t physid, u32 acpi_id,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >         cpu = acpi_register_lapic(physid, acpi_id, ACPI_MADT_ENABLED);
> > > > > > >         if (cpu < 0) {
> > > > > > > -               pr_debug(PREFIX "Unable to map lapic to logical cpu number\n");
> > > > > > > +               if (cpu == -ENOENT)
> > > > > > > +                       pr_debug(PREFIX "Unable to map lapic to logical cpu number\n");
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I don't think it is necessary to print this in the -ENOENT case, as
> > > > > > there is a message for that case that will be printed anyway.
> > > > >
> > > > > Agree, how do you want me to progress? Should I resend patch?
> > > >
> > > > Yes, please.
> > >
> > > I looked in the code and seems like there is one place only in acpi_register_lapic() which returns
> > > EINVAL without any debug prints and that flow can't be because we are providing ACPI_MADT_ENABLED
> > > as an input.
> > >
> > > It looks like that we can safely remove the print from acpi_map_cpu().
> >
> > What about generic_processor_info()?  That may return -EINVAL too silently.
>
> It returns -EINVAL for failure in allocate_logical_cpuid() only and that
> function prints WARN_ONCE inside in such case. You won't miss it.

Fair enough.

So yes, the message printed in acpi_map_cpu() is redundant.

      reply	other threads:[~2019-03-26 21:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-03-26 12:02 [PATCH -next] x86/apic: Reduce print level of CPU limit announcement Leon Romanovsky
2019-03-26 12:29 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-03-26 14:41   ` Leon Romanovsky
2019-03-26 15:12     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-03-26 15:32       ` Leon Romanovsky
2019-03-26 16:30         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-03-26 17:53           ` Leon Romanovsky
2019-03-26 18:08             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2019-03-26 18:31               ` Leon Romanovsky
2019-03-26 21:28                 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]

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=CAJZ5v0gmjLcG-Ho73QRdPm83noGNmJHGcnb9FTdYAFdGFv3gwQ@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=leon@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).