From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965068Ab2EWDbD (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 May 2012 23:31:03 -0400 Received: from mail-pz0-f46.google.com ([209.85.210.46]:62646 "EHLO mail-pz0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964844Ab2EWDbA (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 May 2012 23:31:00 -0400 Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 20:30:58 -0700 (PDT) From: David Rientjes X-X-Sender: rientjes@chino.kir.corp.google.com To: ethan zhao cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Kurt Garloff , Len Brown Subject: Re: ACPI and NUMA guys, please help to check if this patch is OK In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 23 May 2012, ethan zhao wrote: > [PATCH] drivers/acpi/numa.c: Add localities checking code against > proximity domains to slit_valid() > > Some buggy BIOS/ACPI will set different number to SLIT localities and > SRAT proximity domains, > That will make NUMA configuration invalid and kernel will output > information like following > > NUMA:Warning:invalid distance parameter, from=-1 to=-1 distance=83 > > This patch adds some checking code to slit_valid() function in order > to check theSLIT localities > count against SRAT proximity domains number and give clear information > about ACPI bug. > > Signed-off-by: ethan.zhao There's nothing in the ACPI spec that prohibits this and the result is non-fatal (it only emits a warning of the mismatch), so this patch is unnecessary.