linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: James Cleverdon <jamesclv@us.ibm.com>
To: YhLu <YhLu@tyan.com>
Cc: Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@csd.uu.se>,
	ak@muc.de, Matt_Domsch@dell.com, discuss@x86-64.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, suresh.b.siddha@intel.com
Subject: Re: 256 apic id for amd64
Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2005 15:56:05 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200501091556.06060.jamesclv@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3174569B9743D511922F00A0C943142307291365@TYANWEB>

On Friday 07 January 2005 06:53 pm, YhLu wrote:
> I mean keep the bsp physical apic id using 0.
>
> YH

If you mean that Linux will require that the boot processor (BSP) will 
always have physical APIC ID == 0, then it is already too late for 
i386.  I've posted a message to the root of this thread on some example 
boxes with weird APIC numbering schemes that are in our lab.

I don't trust every single BIOS writer to _always_ make the BSP physical 
APIC ID 0 for x86-64 either.  Why do you wish to require this anyway?

It is far safer to make no assumptions about APIC numbering and just 
accept whatever the BIOS gives us in the MPS and/or ACPI tables.  A few 
simple arrays indexed by CPU number will reveal the physical and 
logical APIC IDs whenever we need them.

So, why should Linux care about any CPU's physical APIC ID?


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mikael Pettersson [mailto:mikpe@csd.uu.se]
> Sent: Friday, January 07, 2005 6:38 PM
> To: YhLu; ak@muc.de
> Cc: Matt_Domsch@dell.com; discuss@x86-64.org; jamesclv@us.ibm.com;
> linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; suresh.b.siddha@intel.com
> Subject: Re: 256 apic id for amd64
>
> On Fri, 7 Jan 2005 22:12:00 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> >On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 01:14:24PM -0800, YhLu wrote:
> >> After keep the bsp using 0, the jiffies works well. Werid?
> >
> >Probably a bug somewhere.  But since BSP should be always
> >0 I'm not sure it is worth tracking down.
>
> I hope by "0" you're referring to a Linux kernel defined
> software value and _not_ what the HW or BIOS conjured up!
>
> Case in point: I was involved a while ago in tracking down
> and fixing a local APIC enumeration bug in the x86-32 (i386)
> kernel code, where the kernel failed miserably on some
> dual K7 boxes because (a) only one CPU socket was populated,
> (b) the BIOS assigned that CPU a non-zero ID, and (c) the
> kernel (apic.c) had a bug which triggered when BSP ID != 0.
>
> Never trust a BIOS to DTRT.
>
> /Mikael

-- 
James Cleverdon
IBM LTC (xSeries Linux Solutions)
{jamesclv(Unix, preferred), cleverdj(Notes)} at us dot ibm dot comm

  reply	other threads:[~2005-01-09 23:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-01-08  2:53 256 apic id for amd64 YhLu
2005-01-09 23:56 ` James Cleverdon [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-01-11 19:11 YhLu
2005-01-11 19:04 YhLu
2005-01-10 20:48 YhLu
2005-01-10 20:46 YhLu
2005-01-11  5:36 ` Andi Kleen
2005-01-10 20:37 YhLu
2005-01-10 20:09 YhLu
2005-01-10 20:18 ` Andi Kleen
2005-01-10 19:41 YhLu
2005-01-10 19:43 ` Andi Kleen
2005-01-11  0:42 ` James Cleverdon
2005-01-11  3:28   ` Siddha, Suresh B
2005-01-11  4:42     ` Andi Kleen
2005-01-10 18:48 YhLu
2005-01-10 18:45 ` Andi Kleen
2005-01-10 18:44 Andi Kleen
2005-01-11  4:04 ` Siddha, Suresh B
2005-01-11  4:39   ` Andi Kleen
2005-01-11 17:50   ` Andi Kleen
2005-01-08  2:37 Mikael Pettersson
2005-01-08 15:46 ` Andi Kleen
2005-01-08  1:50 YhLu
2005-01-08  0:50 YhLu
2005-01-08  0:42 ` Andi Kleen
2005-01-08  0:28 YhLu
2005-01-08  0:26 ` James Cleverdon
2005-01-08  0:34   ` Andi Kleen
2005-01-08  0:04 YhLu
2005-01-08  0:12 ` James Cleverdon
2005-01-07 21:44 YhLu
2005-01-07 22:18 ` Andi Kleen
2005-01-07 21:14 YhLu
2005-01-07 21:12 ` Andi Kleen
2005-01-07 19:43 YhLu
2005-01-07 19:40 ` Andi Kleen
2005-01-07 18:27 YhLu
2005-01-07 19:29 ` Andi Kleen
2005-01-07 18:19 YhLu
2005-01-07 19:29 ` Andi Kleen
2005-01-07  2:53 YhLu
2005-01-07 12:24 ` Andi Kleen
2005-01-08  1:30   ` James Cleverdon
2005-01-07  1:06 YhLu
2005-01-07 12:44 ` Andi Kleen
2004-12-30 23:19 YhLu
2004-12-30 23:16 YhLu
2004-12-29  4:43 YhLu
2004-12-30 18:45 ` Andi Kleen
2004-12-30 22:56   ` Matt Domsch
2004-12-30 23:26     ` Andi Kleen

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=200501091556.06060.jamesclv@us.ibm.com \
    --to=jamesclv@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=Matt_Domsch@dell.com \
    --cc=YhLu@tyan.com \
    --cc=ak@muc.de \
    --cc=discuss@x86-64.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mikpe@csd.uu.se \
    --cc=suresh.b.siddha@intel.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).