From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E847EEB64DC for ; Tue, 18 Jul 2023 18:59:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229846AbjGRS7v (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Jul 2023 14:59:51 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:45362 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229452AbjGRS7u (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Jul 2023 14:59:50 -0400 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5FC68F0 for ; Tue, 18 Jul 2023 11:59:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Thomas Gleixner DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1689706787; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=VUSxXGcmIRjp/7eWv7Dj7xeIv9NgHXqog6LPPMoYxtU=; b=clpyVgzmkV7giIEgPu8+ARXPYuSvSWy8D3SLs0n7co/mCr/PEA9mH8GdvvmyPzMuVpzYUA diia7e8G8PcZpQN1pB+vA2yBd6SLqIsBRkA6E7ZpbsFyN4P97Ih6SCkQ7erkHKxbjDCGoi 63A7Kmet0wzgToeSCtJ6MYQAY87PWYxCXCBOH5dcRttnm8+LP1EfN27zJH4X6jcb4Ymajj VcX+P8lU7HCk3UqU2l5u/TQL3l5hgTdOw0aMFnHODlmQUTHxhkvuqvGIi+1K3qj9VuMZgz IFWMnXbDClTASI3AYibYChLgQ1Nzpeiz7xrFxlDA8t925Dr/hGEDYd30FgYCNA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1689706787; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=VUSxXGcmIRjp/7eWv7Dj7xeIv9NgHXqog6LPPMoYxtU=; b=E9cps3qvyuYpKiTnDVYN2Wz3RdvXfrYxO1Q/DDpASIohXHmzMP7UhyL/cAaoBxkpmtCfjd ycjIQTGg2So9uoAw== To: Linus Torvalds Cc: LKML , x86@kernel.org, Andrew Cooper , Tom Lendacky , Paolo Bonzini , Wei Liu , Arjan van de Ven , Juergen Gross Subject: Re: [patch 41/58] x86/apic: Add max_apic_id member In-Reply-To: References: <20230717223049.327865981@linutronix.de> <20230717223225.515238528@linutronix.de> <87h6q1y82v.ffs@tglx> Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2023 20:59:46 +0200 Message-ID: <87351lxcyl.ffs@tglx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 18 2023 at 09:06, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, 18 Jul 2023 at 00:47, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >> >> The confusing part here is the physical APIC ID vs. the destination >> mode. > > Actually, no, what confused me here ended up being that I didn't see > any other limit checking at all for the flat mode, and then I was > "this cannot possibly work up to that limit". > > But it turns out that the limit checking appears to be in the > "physflat" case, not in the simple flat case. > > IOW, the physflat probe function says "I'll take it" whenever > num_possible_cpus() > 8", and that seems to be what then limits the > flat mode to a max of 8 cpus. So the limit was just in another place > than I expected. Right. And obviously you managed to confuse me too :)