From: Nathan Lynch <ntl@pobox.com>
To: Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>
Cc: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@in.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
ashok.raj@intel.com, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: /sys/devices/system/cpu/*: Present cpus or Possible cpus
Date: Wed, 2 May 2007 11:37:57 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070502163757.GF30688@localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070502110022.GA13040@in.ibm.com>
Hi Gautham-
Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
>
> Looking at the topology_init() code, I observe that the meaning of
> the cpuX/ directory entries in /sys/devices/system/cpu/ might be
> different for different architectures.
>
> Looks like, in case of i386, ia64, m32, mips etc, the cpuX directory entries
> represent the "present cpus".
>
> However, in case of powerpc, s390 etc, the cpuX entries represent the
> "possible cpus".
>
> Wondering if there is any particular reason for this discrepancy.
I believe that the powerpc behavior was established before
cpu_present_map was introduced.
> I am not entirely surely if it's due cpu hotplug because
> both i386 and powerpc support it!
powerpc also supports processor add and remove (as opposed to
online/offline); i386 does not AFAIK. I think this may be a reason
for the difference.
> When I do a
> "echo 1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpuX/online" on a power box as root,
> I might get "-bash: echo: write error: Invalid argument"
> because cpuX might not be present!
>
> In case of lpar, cpu_present_map need not necessarily be equal to
> cpu_possible_map, so the above error is observable.
Working as intended. You have to add a cpu to the partition before
you can online it.
> Is this discrepency intentional ?
> Or is it due to the fact that in most cases,
> cpu_present_map == cpu_possible_map, so lets not bother about it :-?
I think it's the inevitable result when architectures are free to
invent their own versions of the same sysfs interface. But is it
really causing a problem in this case?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-05-02 16:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-05-02 11:00 /sys/devices/system/cpu/*: Present cpus or Possible cpus Gautham R Shenoy
2007-05-02 16:37 ` Nathan Lynch [this message]
2007-05-02 18:52 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2007-05-03 13:42 ` Heiko Carstens
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=20070502163757.GF30688@localdomain \
--to=ntl@pobox.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ashok.raj@intel.com \
--cc=ego@in.ibm.com \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vatsa@in.ibm.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox