From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Cooper Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/IO-APIC: adjust setting of destinations Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 17:43:20 +0000 Message-ID: <56462138.1040501@citrix.com> References: <5646136202000078000B4CDE@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> <56460F1C.2070305@citrix.com> <56462ED602000078000B4DEA@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta5.messagelabs.com ([195.245.231.135]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1ZxINh-0004fk-M1 for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 13 Nov 2015 17:43:25 +0000 In-Reply-To: <56462ED602000078000B4DEA@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: xen-devel , Keir Fraser List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 13/11/15 17:41, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 13.11.15 at 17:26, wrote: >> On 13/11/15 15:44, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> setup_IO_APIC_irqs() runs before APs get brought up, so using >>> desc->arch.cpu_mask as best risks it being either empty or having bits >>> for CPUs other than the BP set. Just use the APIC ID of the only >>> online CPU directly. Replace a stray hard_smp_processor_id() at once. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich >> Surely this stray hard_smp_processor_id() needs to be merged into your >> previous patch to remove hard_smp_processor_id() ? > Actually I should have said that the other one depends on this one. > Which one to put that hunk in really doesn't matter much. It would be cleaner to deal with all hard_smp_processor_id() together, as the other hunk is this patch is a far more clear candidate for backport. ~Andrew