[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.55.0804231927420.31934@cliff.in.clinika.pl>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 19:38:16 +0100 (BST)
From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org>
To: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>
cc: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.de>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
linux-pci@...ey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>,
Tom Long Nguyen <tom.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...ox.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: PCI MSI breaks when booting with nosmp
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008, Jesse Barnes wrote:
> Yeah, I'm not particularly attached to either meaning. It looks like we'll
> setup the local apic on 32 bit if the NMI vector is a local apic one, so in
> that case at least the behavior will be the same.
Well, I did not follow changes to the code over the years and I think
enabling the local APIC for the NMI watchdog does not fit the semantics of
"nosmp" very well either. If you want the watchdog, then you can use
"maxcpus=1" or "maxcpus=1 noapic".
> Anyway, we have two options:
> 1) make nosmp/maxcpus=1 imply nolapic (and therefore disable MSI too)
> 2) make nosmp enable the lapic (so MSI will work)
Well, I have a slight affinity towards the first one (with "maxcpus=0"
that is; I'm assuming it's a typo above), but I do not think that is
something to be fiercely fought either.
MAciej
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists