public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: Andreas Herrmann <andreas.herrmann3@amd.com>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@amd64.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, hpa <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c:310 topology_sane.clone.1+0x6e/0x81()
Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 18:59:03 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1338310743.26856.141.camel@twins> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120529152944.GA8263@alberich.amd.com>

On Tue, 2012-05-29 at 17:29 +0200, Andreas Herrmann wrote:

> I've also looked at this. core_siblings mask is broken with this patch.
> And there is this new irritating warning ...

Hehe, you made this irritating hardware ;-) But fair enough.

> I second Boris' suggestion for a fix. But I think the check for
> X86_FEATURE_AMD_DCM should go into topology_sane() which in theory
> could check other things as well.

Unless you plan to go span cache (or even SMT siblings) over physical
IDs I'd strongly argue against putting it in topology_sane().

As it stands I think we should discuss the definition for the generic
topology bits (drivers/base/topology.c), because I think your
Magny-Cours thing does the wrong thing here.

The core span in a phys_id is all nice and such, but what does it mean?
IOW what would you do with it?

I would think the LLC range and the node-span are much more useful
things to have. Once you have nodes the sysfs node topology takes over.


  reply	other threads:[~2012-05-29 16:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-05-29 13:54 WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c:310 topology_sane.clone.1+0x6e/0x81() Borislav Petkov
2012-05-29 14:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-05-29 15:29   ` Andreas Herrmann
2012-05-29 16:59     ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2012-05-29 17:13       ` Borislav Petkov
2012-05-29 17:25         ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-05-29 17:48           ` Andreas Herrmann
2012-06-04 12:41             ` [PATCH] x86, smp: Fix topology checks on AMD MCM Borislav Petkov
2012-06-04 12:43               ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-04 13:37                 ` Borislav Petkov
2012-06-04 13:38                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-04 14:48                     ` Borislav Petkov
2012-06-04 14:56                       ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-04 16:01                         ` Borislav Petkov
2012-06-06 15:31                           ` [PATCH -v2] " Borislav Petkov
2012-06-14  8:39 ` [tip:x86/urgent] x86/smp: Fix topology checks on AMD MCM CPUs tip-bot for 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=1338310743.26856.141.camel@twins \
    --to=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=andreas.herrmann3@amd.com \
    --cc=bp@amd64.org \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox