Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 23 Feb 2012 10:23:06 +0000 | From | Daniel J Blueman <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] x86: Remove wrong error message in x86_default_fixup_cpu_id |
| |
On 22/02/2012 13:47, Andreas Herrmann wrote: > On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 11:05:21AM +0000, Daniel J Blueman wrote: >> On 21/02/2012 10:27, Borislav Petkov wrote: >>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 06:17:05PM +0100, Andreas Herrmann wrote: > [snip] > >>> BTW, I wonder why the fixup code isn't called from the Intel path. At >>> least the mentioned patch suggests that something more generic was >>> introduced here. >>> Right, and I would remove the check in amd.c:srat_detect_node() instead >>> of removing the printk statement in the default implementation. >>> >>> IOW, we need more info on why the check was added only to the AMD path? >>> Daniel? >> The check and fixup wasn't needed in the Intel path thus far, so wasn't >> added. >> >> We could specialise the 'if (c->phys_proc_id != node)' test to check for >> x86_cpuinit.fixup_cpu_id being NULL and drop the default override, if >> that is preferred? > It seems that all the stuff in x86_init.[ch] is using default/noop > functions instead of NULL pointer checks. So we shouldn't deviate from > this for x86_cpuinit.fixup_cpu_id. > > I think attached patch is more suitable to avoid the wrong warning > message. > > Please review.
Yes, this looks reasonable and tests out successfully on systems with and without NumaConnect.
Signed-off-by: Daniel J Blueman <daniel@numascale-asia.com>
Thanks, Daniel
> > > Thanks, > > Andreas > > -- > x86: Remove wrong error message in x86_default_fixup_cpu_id > > It's only called from amd.c:srat_detect_node(). The introduced > condition for calling the fixup code is true for all AMD multi-node > processors, e.g. Magny-Cours and Interlagos. There we have 2 NUMA > nodes on one socket. Thus there are cores having different > numa-node-id but with equal phys_proc_id. > > There is no point to print error messages in such a situation. > > The confusing/misleading error message was introduced with commit > 64be4c1c2428e148de6081af235e2418e6a66dda (x86: Add x86_init platform > override to fix up NUMA core numbering). > > Change the default fixup function (remove the error message), move the > Numascale-specific condition for calling the fixup into the > fixup-function itself and slightly adapt the comment. > > Signed-off-by: Andreas Herrmann<andreas.herrmann3@amd.com> > --- > arch/x86/include/asm/x86_init.h | 2 +- > arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic_numachip.c | 7 +++++-- > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c | 8 ++++---- > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c | 9 --------- > arch/x86/kernel/x86_init.c | 1 + > 5 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/x86_init.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/x86_init.h > index 517d476..1bcacef 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/x86_init.h > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/x86_init.h > @@ -189,6 +189,6 @@ extern struct x86_msi_ops x86_msi; > > extern void x86_init_noop(void); > extern void x86_init_uint_noop(unsigned int unused); > -extern void x86_default_fixup_cpu_id(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c, int node); > +extern void x86_default_fixup_cpu_id(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c, int n); > > #endif > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic_numachip.c b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic_numachip.c > index 09d3d8c..ade0182 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic_numachip.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic_numachip.c > @@ -201,8 +201,11 @@ static void __init map_csrs(void) > > static void fixup_cpu_id(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c, int node) > { > - c->phys_proc_id = node; > - per_cpu(cpu_llc_id, smp_processor_id()) = node; > + > + if (c->phys_proc_id != node) { > + c->phys_proc_id = node; > + per_cpu(cpu_llc_id, smp_processor_id()) = node; > + } > } > > static int __init numachip_system_init(void) > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c > index f4773f4..52b7287 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c > @@ -352,11 +352,11 @@ static void __cpuinit srat_detect_node(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c) > node = per_cpu(cpu_llc_id, cpu); > > /* > - * If core numbers are inconsistent, it's likely a multi-fabric platform, > - * so invoke platform-specific handler > + * On multi-fabric platform (e.g. Numascale NumaChip) a > + * platform-specific handler needs to be called to fixup some > + * IDs of the CPU. > */ > - if (c->phys_proc_id != node) > - x86_cpuinit.fixup_cpu_id(c, node); > + x86_cpuinit.fixup_cpu_id(c, node); > > if (!node_online(node)) { > /* > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c > index d43cad7..37da7a6 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c > @@ -1158,15 +1158,6 @@ static void dbg_restore_debug_regs(void) > #endif /* ! CONFIG_KGDB */ > > /* > - * Prints an error where the NUMA and configured core-number mismatch and the > - * platform didn't override this to fix it up > - */ > -void __cpuinit x86_default_fixup_cpu_id(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c, int node) > -{ > - pr_err("NUMA core number %d differs from configured core number %d\n", node, c->phys_proc_id); > -} > - > -/* > * cpu_init() initializes state that is per-CPU. Some data is already > * initialized (naturally) in the bootstrap process, such as the GDT > * and IDT. We reload them nevertheless, this function acts as a > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/x86_init.c b/arch/x86/kernel/x86_init.c > index 947a06c..67cf78a 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/x86_init.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/x86_init.c > @@ -90,6 +90,7 @@ struct x86_init_ops x86_init __initdata = { > }, > }; > > +void __cpuinit x86_default_fixup_cpu_id(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c, int n) { } > struct x86_cpuinit_ops x86_cpuinit __cpuinitdata = { > .setup_percpu_clockev = setup_secondary_APIC_clock, > .fixup_cpu_id = x86_default_fixup_cpu_id, -- Daniel J Blueman Principal Software Engineer, Numascale Asia
| |