All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
	Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>
Subject: Re: 2.6.16rc5 'found' an extra CPU.
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2006 22:13:48 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060302031348.GE19755@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200603020238.31639.ak@suse.de>

On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 02:38:31AM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
 > 
 > > ACPI: LAPIC (acpi_id[0x01] lapic_id[0x00] enabled)
 > > Processor #0 15:5 APIC version 16
 > > ACPI: LAPIC (acpi_id[0x02] lapic_id[0x01] enabled)
 > > Processor #1 15:5 APIC version 16
 > > ACPI: LAPIC (acpi_id[0x03] lapic_id[0x82] disabled)
 > > ACPI: LAPIC (acpi_id[0x04] lapic_id[0x83] disabled)
 > 
 > It's because of the two disabled CPUs. We decreed at some point
 > that disabled CPUs mean hotpluggable CPUs. But it's doing
 > this for some time so you probably only noticed now.

*boggle*, there really are only two single-core CPUs in there,
with no empty sockets. It's an early stepping of the motherboard
too that supposedly doesn't support dual-core.  So why these are present
at all, let alone 'disabled' is a mystery to me.

logrotate ate the old logs, so I don't have any old bootlogs
to grep through, but I'll take your word for it :)

Why ACPI decides to create 3 processor entries is still odd though.

		Dave


  reply	other threads:[~2006-03-02  3:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-03-01 22:46 2.6.16rc5 'found' an extra CPU Dave Jones
2006-03-01 23:03 ` Dave Jones
2006-03-02  0:55   ` Andi Kleen
2006-03-02  1:19     ` Dave Jones
2006-03-02  1:38       ` Andi Kleen
2006-03-02  3:13         ` Dave Jones [this message]
2006-03-02  3:24           ` Andi Kleen
2006-03-02  3:45             ` Dave Jones
2006-03-02  3:52         ` Ashok Raj
2006-03-02  4:11           ` Dave Jones
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-03-01 23:01 Moore, Robert
2006-03-01 23:01 ` Moore, Robert
2006-03-02  0:55 Chuck Ebbert
2006-03-02  1:09 ` Dave Jones
2006-03-05  0:42   ` Andrew Morton
2006-03-05  2:26     ` Dave Jones
2006-03-02  5:49 Brown, Len
2006-03-02  5:49 ` Brown, Len
2006-03-02  9:33 ` Romano Giannetti
2006-03-02 15:53   ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2006-03-02 15:58     ` Romano Giannetti
2006-03-02 12:14 ` Andi Kleen
2006-03-02 16:30 ` Ashok Raj
2006-03-02 18:44   ` Dave Jones
2006-03-02 19:21     ` Ashok Raj
2006-03-03  7:14       ` Andrew Morton
2006-03-03  7:14         ` Andrew Morton
2006-03-03 17:41         ` Ashok Raj
2006-03-02 17:30 Brown, Len
2006-03-02 17:30 ` Brown, Len
2006-03-02 17:34 Brown, Len
2006-03-02 17:34 ` Brown, Len
2006-03-02 19:16 Brown, Len
2006-03-02 19:16 ` Brown, Len
2006-03-02 19:18 Brown, Len
2006-03-02 19:18 ` Brown, Len
2006-03-02 19:26 Brown, Len
2006-03-02 19:31 ` Dave Jones
2006-03-02 19:33 ` Andi Kleen
2006-03-02 19:37 Brown, Len

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=20060302031348.GE19755@redhat.com \
    --to=davej@redhat.com \
    --cc=ak@suse.de \
    --cc=ashok.raj@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.