From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E49A41422DA; Fri, 31 May 2024 10:07:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1717150038; cv=none; b=ieEj4b43nou41uSiSvfxE0KAFW4vDXcoDtHTw1MdOgBj5irjpjKRGr38VKV4nZHhtrcUn5/LEANNS7NgmkceHRoR/yp9YFh2hj7E3h2JJ8CT5GyjjKLjtQRIth89KU5n2IZbpXvqBfIUKnt474JKHvcTDOgp8xnNZauJvyfrj5A= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1717150038; c=relaxed/simple; bh=NMTU3pxi7UKcMSiTL7Ysh/AVfIuKQmazDHD/xsZGNfc=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=aV+4AksDwOL61aRp50evqVpGd1An5EI1n712GHlhTkQli6MiyefcK8TgramHF8q0byS902Upne4MNMX8OSz3E8sAOeORWHjJNcW3gmCPYL+FAcifIwIc6LIbAsW+tr9UyB4GHvXGF0oevdauZiCSehfesDTg9XN79bV+8BEsDfw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=zI2/dNii; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=E0QquJ1L; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="zI2/dNii"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="E0QquJ1L" From: Thomas Gleixner DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1717150034; 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=YEhhT+5dH1vYGUO4W2LMvyfj5PkiRdgoZHd30AvP03A=; b=zI2/dNiiftJHjwSy2qBj/TkVOGN/az4z04M5u0rB5C+1zWjeQNXzkdrF3F725nvE1xopZa GX2SA9GyTBoeRm/xsGiOrTbxH37vPyQ0Es7Mnr0Vo3/MXF4kK7dO1t93E+zMIX5ujWublK zZqzLd5JAV6LdDEC8clsUSyB+m5mXYbwmNo3iMxFF6699mT6GbUS/CgQb5qOkV+7CiflP0 hHIzrmhZiQyOyJYCWTRNLRE688nFPGSSe3zMsnj/9YDxnfreyO/x7NxHE1YvAdAXj0WDvh cC1ghZLN3hap/Tiea69Bu+RNrMKKK3+3/ubldgS/WdlEk1UVtrcU54VU2MLGgg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1717150034; 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=YEhhT+5dH1vYGUO4W2LMvyfj5PkiRdgoZHd30AvP03A=; b=E0QquJ1LURRSgg3AIudbCUfBMHUXcoKDHNRPc0soIX51ytOK8+HZtPA0f5JPBbwmxm4rh0 8ZhOjWIk3mC/z7AA== To: Peter Schneider Cc: LKML , x86@kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, regressions@lists.linux.dev, christian@heusel.eu Subject: Re: Kernel 6.9 regression: X86: Bogus messages from topology detection In-Reply-To: <087b4298-6564-40ad-a4fb-32dbb2f74a43@googlemail.com> References: <877cffcs7h.ffs@tglx> <16cd76b1-a512-4a7b-a304-5e4e31af3c8a@googlemail.com> <87zfs78zxq.ffs@tglx> <76b1e0b9-26ae-4915-920d-9093f057796b@googlemail.com> <87r0dj8ls4.ffs@tglx> <87o78n8fe2.ffs@tglx> <87le3r8dyw.ffs@tglx> <87ikyu8jp4.ffs@tglx> <87frty8j9p.ffs@tglx> <087b4298-6564-40ad-a4fb-32dbb2f74a43@googlemail.com> Date: Fri, 31 May 2024 12:07:11 +0200 Message-ID: <87zfs670s0.ffs@tglx> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Peter! On Fri, May 31 2024 at 11:41, Peter Schneider wrote: > Anyway, this last version of your patch fixes things for me, please see attached dmesg > output. Thanks very much for investigating and fixing this issue! > > Tested-by: Peter Schneider > > If you like, I can retest with your first patch (with additional debug > info output) additionally applied on top of that and send the output, > if that would be useful for you. No need. I'm properly coffeiniated and confident enough that this cures it. :) Thanks a lot for testing and providing all the information! tglx