All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nathan Lynch <ntl@pobox.com>
To: Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>
Cc: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@in.ibm.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	ashok.raj@intel.com, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: /sys/devices/system/cpu/*: Present cpus or Possible cpus
Date: Wed, 2 May 2007 11:37:57 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070502163757.GF30688@localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070502110022.GA13040@in.ibm.com>

Hi Gautham-

Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
> 
> Looking at the topology_init() code, I observe that the meaning of
> the cpuX/ directory entries in /sys/devices/system/cpu/ might be
> different for different architectures. 
> 
> Looks like, in case of i386, ia64, m32, mips etc, the cpuX directory entries
> represent the "present cpus".
> 
> However, in case of powerpc, s390 etc, the cpuX entries represent the
> "possible cpus".
> 
> Wondering if there is any particular reason for this discrepancy.

I believe that the powerpc behavior was established before
cpu_present_map was introduced.


> I am not entirely surely if it's due cpu hotplug because 
> both i386 and powerpc support it!

powerpc also supports processor add and remove (as opposed to
online/offline); i386 does not AFAIK.  I think this may be a reason
for the difference.


> When I do a 
> "echo 1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpuX/online" on a power box as root, 
> I might get "-bash: echo: write error: Invalid argument" 
> because cpuX might not be present!
>
> In case of lpar, cpu_present_map need not necessarily be equal to
> cpu_possible_map, so the above error is observable.

Working as intended.  You have to add a cpu to the partition before
you can online it.


> Is this discrepency intentional ?
> Or is it due to the fact that in most cases,
> cpu_present_map == cpu_possible_map, so lets not bother about it :-?

I think it's the inevitable result when architectures are free to
invent their own versions of the same sysfs interface.  But is it
really causing a problem in this case?


  reply	other threads:[~2007-05-02 16:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-05-02 11:00 /sys/devices/system/cpu/*: Present cpus or Possible cpus Gautham R Shenoy
2007-05-02 16:37 ` Nathan Lynch [this message]
2007-05-02 18:52   ` Gautham R Shenoy
2007-05-03 13:42     ` Heiko Carstens

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=20070502163757.GF30688@localdomain \
    --to=ntl@pobox.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=ashok.raj@intel.com \
    --cc=ego@in.ibm.com \
    --cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=vatsa@in.ibm.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 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.