[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48B18F98.1080304@kernel.org>
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:43:04 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...nel.org>
To: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...il.com>
CC: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Subject: Re: latest -git: WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/ipi.c:123 send_IPI_mask_bitmask+0xc3/0xe0()
Vegard Nossum wrote:
>
> Hm.
>
> Kernel fails to detect cpu1 at all.
>
> I am currently unsure of whether it's your patch or not. But it's the
> same config that I've been booting for ages (and I copy it over for
> each new kernel version I check out).
>
> Processor #0 (Bootup-CPU)
> I/O APIC #2 Version 32 at 0xFEC00000.
> Enabling APIC mode: Flat. Using 1 I/O APICs
> Processors: 1
> SMP: Allowing 1 CPUs, 0 hotplug CPUs
> mapped APIC to ffffb000 (fee00000)
> mapped IOAPIC to ffffa000 (fec00000)
> Allocating PCI resources starting at 50000000 (gap: 40000000:bee00000)
> PERCPU: Allocating 1221764 bytes of per cpu data
> NR_CPUS: 7, nr_cpu_ids: 1, nr_node_ids 1
>
> I really don't get it. Is this something that can be caused by your
> patch _at all_ ?
>
Well, if smp_call_function_single() is called during the CPU up
sequence, without the CPU having been added to the online mask, then
yes, it could. The most likely place would be from a notifier.
That makes it ugly. Need to track down the reason.
-hpa
--
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