From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754819Ab2DPRcN (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Apr 2012 13:32:13 -0400 Received: from va3ehsobe004.messaging.microsoft.com ([216.32.180.14]:29460 "EHLO va3outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753713Ab2DPRcL (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Apr 2012 13:32:11 -0400 X-SpamScore: -9 X-BigFish: VPS-9(zz1432N98dKzz1202hzz8275bh8275dhz2dh668h839h944hd25hd2bh) X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:163.181.249.109;KIP:(null);UIP:(null);IPV:NLI;H:ausb3twp02.amd.com;RD:none;EFVD:NLI X-WSS-ID: 0M2L21A-02-86W-02 X-M-MSG: Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2012 19:31:46 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov To: Borislav Petkov , Ingo Molnar , , , , , , , , Andreas Herrmann Subject: Re: [PATCH resend] x86/platform: Remove incorrect error message in x86_default_fixup_cpu_id() Message-ID: <20120416173146.GA4838@aftab> References: <20120224153127.GD28921@alberich.amd.com> <20120302110440.GA24019@elte.hu> <20120302115130.GA17876@alberich.amd.com> <20120402160648.GR27684@alberich.amd.com> <20120404123809.GB5193@x1.osrc.amd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120404123809.GB5193@x1.osrc.amd.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-OriginatorOrg: amd.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 02:38:09PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 06:06:48PM +0200, Andreas Herrmann wrote: > > > > It's only called from amd.c:srat_detect_node(). The introduced > > condition for calling the fixup code is true for all AMD multi-node > > processors, e.g. Magny-Cours and Interlagos. There we have 2 NUMA > > nodes on one socket. Thus there are cores having different > > numa-node-id but with equal phys_proc_id. > > > > There is no point to print error messages in such a situation. > > > > The confusing/misleading error message was introduced with commit > > 64be4c1c2428e148de6081af235e2418e6a66dda (x86: Add x86_init platform > > override to fix up NUMA core numbering). > > > > Remove the default fixup function (especially the error message) and > > replace it by a NULL pointer check, move the Numascale-specific > > condition for calling the fixup into the fixup-function itself and > > slightly adapt the comment. > > > > Cc: > > Signed-off-by: Andreas Herrmann > > --- > > arch/x86/include/asm/x86_init.h | 1 - > > arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic_numachip.c | 7 +++++-- > > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c | 7 ++++--- > > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c | 9 --------- > > arch/x86/kernel/x86_init.c | 1 - > > 5 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) > > > > This patch didn't make it into v3.3. > > But the misleading error message introduced with numachip support was > > merged. > > Yes, please apply this one, I still get the following on my box with > 3.4-rc1+: > > [ 0.382396] Booting Node 0, Processors #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 Ok. > [ 0.454471] Booting Node 1, Processors #6 > [ 0.469600] NUMA core number 1 differs from configured core number 0 > [ 0.478361] #7 > [ 0.490949] NUMA core number 1 differs from configured core number 0 > [ 0.499695] #8 > [ 0.512577] NUMA core number 1 differs from configured core number 0 > [ 0.521331] #9 > [ 0.533921] NUMA core number 1 differs from configured core number 0 > [ 0.542679] #10 > [ 0.555340] NUMA core number 1 differs from configured core number 0 > [ 0.564088] #11 > [ 0.576730] NUMA core number 1 differs from configured core number 0 Still happens on -rc3. Ingo, can we please merge the above fix before 3.4 is out? Thanks. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Advanced Micro Devices GmbH Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach GM: Alberto Bozzo Reg: Dornach, Landkreis Muenchen HRB Nr. 43632 WEEE Registernr: 129 19551