From: Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>
To: "Zhang, Rui" <rui.zhang@intel.com>
Cc: "peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>,
"bp@alien8.de" <bp@alien8.de>,
"dave.hansen@linux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
"Chen, Tim C" <tim.c.chen@intel.com>,
"hpa@zytor.com" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"paulmck@kernel.org" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"Woodhouse, David" <dwmw@amazon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [Patch v2 2/2] x86/tsc: use logical_packages as a better estimation of socket numbers
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2023 19:47:00 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZIxLtIsWABFCSFg/@feng-clx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <dd0a7053f762edaecdf7613da5281a2c2c73ca77.camel@intel.com>
On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 07:23:12PM +0800, Zhang, Rui wrote:
> On Fri, 2023-06-16 at 11:42 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 09:19:18AM +0000, Zhang, Rui wrote:
> >
> > > According to the MADT, there are indeed 40 valid CPUs. And then 80
> > > CPUs
> > > with
> > >
> > > APIC ID : FF
> > > enabled : 0
> > > Online capable : 0
> > >
> > > a dumb question, why are these CPUs added into the possible_mask?
> > > I can dig into this later but I just don't have a quick answer at
> > > the
> > > moment.
> >
> > I really don't know.. I've not gotten around to reading that part of
> > the
> > x86 code yet.
> >
> >
> I did a double check.
>
> The MADT is composed of
>
> 1. 40 valid LAPIC entries.
> 2. 80 invalid LAPIC entries with
> APIC ID : FF
> Enabled : 0
> Online capable: 0
> I'm mot sure why "Online capable" is decoded because this new bit is
> introduced in ACPI 6.3. Maybe a problem in the acpica tool?
> These entries are ignored because of the invalid APIC ID.
> 3. 120 x2APIC entries with
> APIC ID : valid value
> Enabled : 0
> As "Online capable bit" is not supported, these 120 x2APIC entries
> are counted as possible CPUs.
Nice shot!
So IIUC, this is a firmware bug, and deserves a warning or error
message? And without 'possible_cpus' or 'nr_cpus' parameter, system
will waste quite some memory due to "nr_cpu_ids == 160".
From Peter's log:
[ 2.664257] smpboot: Max logical packages: 8
it also revealed again the problem in 'calculate_max_logical_packages()':
"
ncpus = cpu_data(0).booted_cores * topology_max_smt_threads();
__max_logical_packages = DIV_ROUND_UP(total_cpus, ncpus);
pr_info("Max logical packages: %u\n", __max_logical_packages);
"
But 'logical_packages' should still be correct in this case.
Thanks,
Feng
> That is why we got 160 possible CPUs.
>
> thanks,
> rui
>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-16 11:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-06-13 5:25 [Patch v2 1/2] smp: Add helper function to mark possible bad package number Feng Tang
2023-06-13 5:25 ` [Patch v2 2/2] x86/tsc: use logical_packages as a better estimation of socket numbers Feng Tang
2023-06-15 9:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-06-16 6:53 ` Zhang, Rui
2023-06-16 8:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-06-16 8:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-06-16 9:19 ` Zhang, Rui
2023-06-16 9:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-06-16 11:23 ` Zhang, Rui
2023-06-16 11:47 ` Feng Tang [this message]
2023-06-16 8:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-06-19 10:42 ` Feng Tang
2023-06-16 7:18 ` Feng Tang
2023-06-22 14:27 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-06-22 23:07 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-06-23 15:49 ` Zhang, Rui
[not found] ` <ZJW0gi5oQQbxf8Df@feng-clx>
2023-06-25 14:51 ` Feng Tang
2023-06-27 11:14 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-06-29 13:27 ` Feng Tang
2023-07-17 13:38 ` Feng Tang
2023-07-26 19:37 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-07-27 1:24 ` Feng Tang
2023-06-23 15:36 ` Zhang, Rui
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=ZIxLtIsWABFCSFg/@feng-clx \
--to=feng.tang@intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dwmw@amazon.co.uk \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rui.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tim.c.chen@intel.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.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