public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
To: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
	the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because	there's no local APIC
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2009 19:01:16 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A35AB6C.7090605@goop.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090612201117.GA29923@lenovo>

On 06/12/09 13:11, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> just for the record -- this removement has a side effect.
> Imagine I've passed "disableapic" so I expect as many as
> possible apic-related code would not pass thru execution.
> Now we would have (say for IBM Summit)
>
> acpi_parse_madt
>    default_acpi_madt_oem_check
>      summit_acpi_madt_oem_check
>        mark_tsc_unstable
>        setup_summit
>
> Dunno if it harmless or no but it changes kernel behaviour.
> cpu_has_apic cleared if disableapic option (which is early
> param) passed to kernel.
>
> Just a note. Didn't walk thru all ways.
>    

Yeah, that occured to me over the weekend.  Some of those cpu_has_apic 
tests should probably be replaced with explicit tests to see if noapic 
was specified.  I'll go over it with that in mind.

Thanks,
     J

  reply	other threads:[~2009-06-15  2:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-06-12 18:22 [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-12 18:28 ` Alan Cox
2009-06-12 18:33   ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-12 20:11 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2009-06-15  2:01   ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge [this message]
2009-06-12 20:35 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-15  2:06   ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-15 10:47     ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-15 20:49       ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-15 21:58         ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-16 19:38           ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-17  5:10             ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-17 12:02             ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-17 17:32               ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-18  2:58                 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-18 19:34                   ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-18 20:28                     ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-18 21:09                       ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-19  1:38                         ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-19  3:10                           ` [Xen-devel] " Jiang, Yunhong
2009-06-18 12:26                 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-15 10:51 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-18 16:08 ` Len Brown
2009-06-18 19:14   ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-18 19:27     ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-18 19:48       ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-18 20:39         ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-18 22:33           ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-19  2:42             ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-19 19:58               ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-06-19 23:44                 ` [Xen-devel] " Nakajima, Jun
2009-06-20  7:39                   ` Keir Fraser
2009-06-20  8:21                     ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-20  8:57                       ` Tian, Kevin
2009-06-20 10:22                         ` Keir Fraser
2009-06-20  8:18                   ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-19  5:32             ` Yinghai Lu
2009-06-19  5:50               ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-19  7:52               ` [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs justbecause " Jan Beulich
2009-06-19  8:16                 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-20  3:58                   ` Yinghai Lu
2009-06-20  5:40                     ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-06-20  5:58                       ` Yinghai Lu
2009-06-18 22:51     ` [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because " Maciej W. Rozycki

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=4A35AB6C.7090605@goop.org \
    --to=jeremy@goop.org \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=gorcunov@gmail.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.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