[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080927195615.GA244243@sgi.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2008 14:56:16 -0500
From: Jack Steiner <steiner@....com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] - UV fix for size of hub mappings
On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 07:42:33PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Jack Steiner <steiner@....com> wrote:
>
> > Fix the size of the mappings of UV hub registers. Size must be a
> > function of the maximum node number within the SSI.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jack Steiner <steiner@....com>
>
> applied to tip/x86/uv, thanks Jack!
>
> i'm wondering, the code still has a couple of ZZZ fixmes like:
>
> #ifdef ZZZ /* Needs x2apic patch */
> static void uv_send_IPI_self(int vector)
> {
> apic_write(APIC_SELF_IPI, vector);
> }
> #endif
>
> x2apic support is available in tip/master, so it would be nice to glue
> UV to generic x2apic support properly and remove duplication and fixmes.
Good point. I'll send the fixes to you early next week. Recently,
I've been focused on a distro release which is still waiting for
the x2apic code. However, I don't need to wait to fix this upstream...
> For example, do we really need apic_x2apic_uv_x, or could we use
> apic_x2apic_cluster?
Unfortunately, we really need a uv genapic. IPIs on large UV systems
can't use an x2apic model. Because of the size of our large systems, APICIDs
in the cpu MSRs are not globally unique. We have a special feature
in the UV chipset that must be used for on large systems for IPIs.
Small & medium sized system can and do use the x2apic genapic.
--- jack
--
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