Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] x86, apic: Don't count the CPU with BP flag from MP table as booting-up CPU

HATAYAMA Daisuke
2013-11-12T09:59:35Z

(2013/11/12 9:40), HATAYAMA Daisuke wrote:
> (2013/11/12 1:52), Vivek Goyal wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 11:52:30AM +0900, HATAYAMA Daisuke wrote:
>>
>> [..]
>>> Looking at my past investigation, kernel/mpparse.c, mm/amdtopology.c and
>>> platform/visws/visws_quirks.c assumes that boot_cpu_physical_apicid
>>> has initial apicid of the BSP, not the current actual booting-up cpu.
>>>
>>> These three are called in get_smp_config() below. If either of them is
>>> called actually, boot_cpu_physical_apicid has the apicid different from
>>> the current actual booting-up cpu temporarily. But init_apic_mappings()
>>> soon modifies back the value to the one obtained by read_apic_id().
>>>
>>> /*
>>> * Read APIC and some other early information from ACPI tables.
>>> */
>>> acpi_boot_init();
>>> sfi_init();
>>> x86_dtb_init();
>>>
>>> /*
>>> * get boot-time SMP configuration:
>>> */
>>> if (smp_found_config)
>>> get_smp_config();
>>>
>>> prefill_possible_map();
>>>
>>> init_cpu_to_node();
>>>
>>> init_apic_mappings();
>>>
>>> So, thanks to init_apic_mappings(), the patch set would work without the
>>> first patch... This is a careless point in this patch set.
>>>
>>
>> If init_apic_mappings(), is making sure that boot_cpu_physical_apicid is
>> apic id of booting processor, and you don't need first patch of your
>> series, then I think atleast re-post your patch series without first
>> patch.
>>
>
> Yes, I'll repost soon.
>
>> And then there can be another series which looks into whether we need
>> two different variables or not and if we do, then a separate variable
>> bsp_physical_apicid will track the bsp id as reported by BIOS and
>> boot_cpu_physical_apicid will track apic id of booting cpu. This might
>> a very big and slow cleanup. So I think blocking the first patch series
>> behind it might not make much sense.
>>
>
> Yes, the current handling of boot_cpu_physical_apicid looks strange and
> should be cleaned up, but the cleaning up needs reviewing together with
> the maintainers for the corresponding part; in particular, it can be
> lengthy for the reviewing on amdtopology.c. I leave this as another
> work for the time being.
>

Sorry for my confusion. It's necessary to introduce a new variable to keep
the initial APIC ID for the processor with BSP flag on IA32_APIC_BASE MSR,
which is needed in case of AP is specified by disable_cpu_apicid and using
MP table.

I've posted new v5 patch set a little ago. Could you please review it?

--
Thanks.
HATAYAMA, Daisuke