From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265986AbUG0OSp (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jul 2004 10:18:45 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265966AbUG0OSp (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jul 2004 10:18:45 -0400 Received: from cantor.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:43230 "EHLO Cantor.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265986AbUG0OQb (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Jul 2004 10:16:31 -0400 Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 16:16:28 +0200 From: Andi Kleen To: colpatch@us.ibm.com Cc: jbarnes@sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mbligh@aracnet.com, lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Change pcibus_to_cpumask() to pcibus_to_node() Message-Id: <20040727161628.56a03aec.ak@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <1090887007.16676.18.camel@arrakis> References: <1090887007.16676.18.camel@arrakis> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.11 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 17:10:08 -0700 Matthew Dobson wrote: > So in discussions with Jesse at OLS, we decided that pcibus_to_node() is > a more generally useful function than pcibus_to_cpumask(). If anyone > disagrees with that, now would be a good time to let us know. Not sure that is a good idea. Sometimes this information is not available. With pcibus_to_cpumask() the fallback is obvious, but it isn't with pcibus_to_node(). Returning a random node is wrong. > This is just a preliminary patch. It needs review for x86_64, as I > don't know how to properly populate the mp_bus_to_node (which used to be > mp_bus_to_cpumask) array. It's impossible currently - I need an ACPI 3.0 BIOS to get this information. Even then there will be machines who don't supply it. I tried some time ago to get it from the hardware, but the hardware registers were arcane enough that I didn't find it easy enough. Relying on firmware for this thing is probably a better idea anyways. -Andi