From: Andy Whitcroft <apw@shadowen.org>
To: kmannth@us.ibm.com
Cc: torvalds@osdl.org, lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
andrew <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] i383 numa: fix numaq/summit apicid conflict
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2006 10:57:11 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <45238577.5090200@shadowen.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1159925153.6512.11.camel@keithlap>
keith mannthey wrote:
> From: Keith Mannthey <kmannth@us.ibm.com>
>
> This patch allows numaq to properly align cpus to their given node
> during boot. Pass logical apicid to apicid_to_node and allow the summit
> sub-arch to use physical apicid (hard_smp_processor_id()).
> Tested against numaq and summit based systems with no issues. against
> 2.6.18-git18.
>
> Signed-off-by: Keith Mannthey <kmannth@us.ibm.com>
> ---
> arch/i386/kernel/smpboot.c | 2 +-
> include/asm-i386/mach-summit/mach_apic.h | 2 +-
> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff -urN linux-2.6.18/arch/i386/kernel/smpboot.c linux-2.6.18-git18/arch/i386/kernel/smpboot.c
> --- linux-2.6.18/arch/i386/kernel/smpboot.c 2006-10-02 02:59:49.000000000 -0700
> +++ linux-2.6.18-git18/arch/i386/kernel/smpboot.c 2006-10-02 00:36:52.000000000 -0700
> @@ -648,7 +648,7 @@
> {
> int cpu = smp_processor_id();
> int apicid = logical_smp_processor_id();
> - int node = apicid_to_node(hard_smp_processor_id());
> + int node = apicid_to_node(apicid);
>
> if (!node_online(node))
> node = first_online_node;
> diff -urN linux-2.6.18/include/asm-i386/mach-summit/mach_apic.h linux-2.6.18-git18/include/asm-i386/mach-summit/mach_apic.h
> --- linux-2.6.18/include/asm-i386/mach-summit/mach_apic.h 2006-10-02 02:59:54.000000000 -0700
> +++ linux-2.6.18-git18/include/asm-i386/mach-summit/mach_apic.h 2006-10-02 00:51:24.000000000 -0700
> @@ -88,7 +88,7 @@
>
> static inline int apicid_to_node(int logical_apicid)
> {
> - return apicid_2_node[logical_apicid];
> + return apicid_2_node[hard_smp_processor_id()];
> }
>
> /* Mapping from cpu number to logical apicid */
My worry here is that we might have users who are calling this about
other cpus. As you have effectivly ignored the parameter on summit here.
Can we not just map the hard_smp_processor_id to its logical apic id
when filling in the apicid_2_node array on summit? Such that it really
does have the logical id in there?
-apw
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-10-04 9:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-10-04 1:25 [PATCH 1/1] i383 numa: fix numaq/summit apicid conflict keith mannthey
2006-10-04 9:57 ` Andy Whitcroft [this message]
2006-10-04 17:46 ` keith mannthey
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=45238577.5090200@shadowen.org \
--to=apw@shadowen.org \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=kmannth@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
/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