public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com>
To: Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
	Roland Dreier <rdreier@cisco.com>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xenotime.net>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
	Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Jack Steiner <steiner@sgi.com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
	x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] x86: Limit the number of processor bootup messages
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 13:05:19 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B03100F.4080307@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <86802c440911171210x4780c08cg3b3260afd5d2bc5d@mail.gmail.com>



Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 11:17 AM, Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com> wrote:
>> When there are a large number of processors in a system, there
>> is an excessive amount of messages sent to the system console.
>> It's estimated that with 4096 processors in a system, and the
>> console baudrate set to 56K, the startup messages will take
>> about 84 minutes to clear the serial port.
>>
>> This set of patches limits the number of repetitious messages
>> which contain no additional information.  Much of this information
>> is obtainable from the /proc and /sysfs.   Some of the messages
>> are also sent to the kernel log buffer as KERN_DEBUG messages so
>> dmesg can be used to examine more closely any details specific to
>> a problem.
>>
>> The list of message transformations....
>>
>> For system_state == SYSTEM_BOOTING:
>>
>> Booting Node   0, Processors  #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 Ok.
>> Booting Node   1, Processors  #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 #15 Ok.
>> ..
>> Booting Node   3, Processors  #56 #57 #58 #59 #60 #61 #62 #63 Ok.
>> Brought up 64 CPUs
>>
>> The following lines have been removed:
>>
>>        CPU: Physical Processor ID:
>>        CPU: Processor Core ID:
>>        CPU %d/0x%x -> Node %d
> 
> please don't.
> 
> YH

The current output format is:

[    1.752861] Booting Node   0, Processors  #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 Ok.
[    2.271831] Booting Node   1, Processors  #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 #15 Ok.
[    2.858473] Booting Node   2, Processors  #16 #17 #18 #19 #20 #21 #22 #23 Ok.
[    3.445168] Booting Node   3, Processors  #24 #25 #26 #27 #28 #29 #30 #31 Ok.
[    4.031750] Booting Node   0, Processors  #32 #33 #34 #35 #36 #37 #38 #39 Ok.
[    4.618461] Booting Node   1, Processors  #40 #41 #42 #43 #44 #45 #46 #47 Ok.
[    5.206036] Booting Node   2, Processors  #48 #49 #50 #51 #52 #53 #54 #55 Ok.
[    5.795760] Booting Node   3, Processors  #56 #57 #58 #59 #60 #61 #62 #63 Ok.
[    6.382678] Skipped synchronization checks as TSC is reliable.
[    6.389254] Brought up 64 CPUs
[    6.392705] Total of 64 processors activated (294277.71 BogoMIPS).

So cpu/node is retained.  How would you propose interjecting the core and cpu ids?
A summary after the above?  (These are obtainable from /proc/cpuinfo.  Any reason
why the information is required at boot time?)

I had proposed to send them to the kernel debug log buffer, but was told they
were not needed so I removed them.

Here is the same info:

53> cat simple.awk
#!/bin/bash

cat $1 | awk '
{
        if ($1 == "processor")
                cpu = $3;

        if ($1 == "physical" && $2 == "id")
                phyid = $4;

        if ($1 == "core" && $2 == "id") {
                coreid = $4;
                printf "CPU%d: Physical Processor ID: %d\n", cpu, phyid;
                printf "CPU%d: Physical Core ID: %d\n", cpu, coreid;
        }
}
'
54> ./simple.awk /proc/cpuinfo
CPU0: Physical Processor ID: 0
CPU0: Physical Core ID: 0
CPU1: Physical Processor ID: 0
CPU1: Physical Core ID: 1
CPU2: Physical Processor ID: 0
CPU2: Physical Core ID: 3
CPU3: Physical Processor ID: 0
CPU3: Physical Core ID: 8
CPU4: Physical Processor ID: 0
CPU4: Physical Core ID: 10
CPU5: Physical Processor ID: 0
CPU5: Physical Core ID: 11
CPU6: Physical Processor ID: 1
CPU6: Physical Core ID: 0
CPU7: Physical Processor ID: 1
CPU7: Physical Core ID: 1
CPU8: Physical Processor ID: 1

<and so on>

CPU45: Physical Processor ID: 3
CPU45: Physical Core ID: 9
CPU46: Physical Processor ID: 3
CPU46: Physical Core ID: 10
CPU47: Physical Processor ID: 3
CPU47: Physical Core ID: 11

  parent reply	other threads:[~2009-11-17 21:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-11-17 19:17 [PATCH 0/5] Limit console output by suppressing repetitious messages Mike Travis
2009-11-17 19:17 ` [PATCH 1/5] x86: Limit the number of processor bootup messages Mike Travis
2009-11-17 20:10   ` Yinghai Lu
2009-11-17 20:29     ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-11-17 21:11       ` Yinghai Lu
2009-11-18  2:38         ` Yinghai Lu
2009-11-18 17:44           ` Mike Travis
2009-11-18 17:43         ` Mike Travis
2009-11-17 21:05     ` Mike Travis [this message]
2009-11-18 10:48   ` Borislav Petkov
2009-11-18 17:18     ` Mike Travis
2009-11-18 18:08       ` Borislav Petkov
2009-11-17 19:17 ` [PATCH 2/5] INIT: Limit the number of per cpu calibration " Mike Travis
2009-11-17 19:17 ` [PATCH 3/5] firmware: Limit the number of per cpu firmware messages during bootup Mike Travis
2009-11-17 19:17 ` [PATCH 4/5] sched: Limit the number of scheduler debug messages Mike Travis
2009-11-17 19:17 ` [PATCH 5/5] x86: Limit number of per cpu TSC sync messages Mike Travis
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-11-18  0:22 [PATCH 0/5] Limit console output by suppressing repetitious messages Mike Travis
2009-11-18  0:22 ` [PATCH 1/5] x86: Limit the number of processor bootup messages Mike Travis
2009-11-18  2:45   ` Yinghai Lu
2009-11-18 17:43     ` Mike Travis
2009-11-26  9:15   ` Ingo Molnar

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=4B03100F.4080307@sgi.com \
    --to=travis@sgi.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=gregkh@suse.de \
    --cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=rdreier@cisco.com \
    --cc=rdunlap@xenotime.net \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
    --cc=seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=steiner@sgi.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=yhlu.kernel@gmail.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