From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: "Zhang, Rui" <rui.zhang@intel.com>,
"Brown, Len" <len.brown@intel.com>,
"zhang.jia@linux.alibaba.com" <zhang.jia@linux.alibaba.com>,
"bp@alien8.de" <bp@alien8.de>,
"dave.hansen@linux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
"hpa@zytor.com" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH V2 0/1] x86: cpu topology fix and question on x86_max_cores
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2023 10:00:54 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y/SIRmCE1KJdsRBT@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87edqkosty.ffs@tglx>
On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 11:49:45PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > I thought of improving this by parsing all the valid APIC-IDs in MADT
> > during BSP bootup, and get such information by decoding the APIC-IDs
> > using the APIC-ID layout information retrieved from BSP. But this is
> > likely to be a fertile new source of bugs as Dave concerned.
>
> The APIC-IDs are only usefull if there is an architected scheme how they
> are assigned. Is there such a thing?
Isn't that given through CPUID? Or are we worried each CPU will have
different values in the topology leafs?
We really should have added that CPUID uniformity sanity check a long
while ago :-(
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-02-21 9:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-02-20 3:28 [RFC PATCH V2 0/1] x86: cpu topology fix and question on x86_max_cores Zhang Rui
2023-02-20 3:28 ` [PATCH V2 1/1] x86/topology: fix erroneous smp_num_siblings on Intel Hybrid platform Zhang Rui
2023-02-20 11:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-02-21 8:34 ` Zhang, Rui
2023-03-13 2:05 ` Zhang, Rui
2023-02-20 10:36 ` [RFC PATCH V2 0/1] x86: cpu topology fix and question on x86_max_cores Peter Zijlstra
2023-02-20 14:40 ` Zhang, Rui
2023-02-20 11:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-02-20 14:33 ` Zhang, Rui
2023-02-20 19:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-02-20 22:52 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-02-21 8:01 ` Zhang, Rui
2023-02-20 22:49 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-02-21 8:26 ` Zhang, Rui
2023-03-07 16:10 ` Zhang, Rui
2023-03-08 2:46 ` Brown, Len
2023-02-21 9:00 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2023-02-21 10:09 ` Borislav Petkov
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=Y/SIRmCE1KJdsRBT@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=rui.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=zhang.jia@linux.alibaba.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.