From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 21:26:27 -0500 From: Jack Steiner Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] x86_64: Support for new UV apic Message-ID: <20080331022627.GE20619@sgi.com> References: <20080328191216.GA16455@sgi.com> <86802c440803301622j2874ca56t51b52a54920a233b@mail.gmail.com> <86802c440803301833r2229900cw99129515822dc373@mail.gmail.com> <20080331021224.GB20619@sgi.com> <86802c440803301923m29b6a0coca7f61975331cbe5@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <86802c440803301923m29b6a0coca7f61975331cbe5@mail.gmail.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Yinghai Lu Cc: Andi Kleen , mingo@elte.hu, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 07:23:07PM -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote: > On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 7:12 PM, Jack Steiner wrote: > > > > Did you test it on non UV_X2APIC box? > > > > > > anyway the read_apic_id is totally wrong, even for your UV_X2APIC box. > > > because id=apic_read(APIC_ID) will have apic_id at bits [31,24], and > > > id |= __get_cpu_var(x2apic_extra_bits) is assuming that is on bits [5,0] > > > > > > so you even didn't test in your UV_X2APIC box! > > > > > > > It works fine on UV_X2APIX boxes because the double shift does > > not occur. However, support for UV_X2APIC is dependent on > > x2apic code that is not yet in the tree. Once the APIC > > is switched into x2apic mode, the apicid is located in the LOW > > bits of the apicid register, not the HIGH bits. > > oh, so that will need have new version GET_APIC_ID too. Yes, although I think all the changes will be unified into one non-inline function that is a combination of GET_APIC_ID() & read_apic_id(). --- jack -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org