[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A8DFD92.3060502@zytor.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 18:51:14 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
CC: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
Alex Chiang <achiang@...com>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: add /proc/cpuinfo/physical id quirks
On 08/20/2009 05:32 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> I agree... if this ID is used for topology detection, we shouldn't
>> replace it arbitrarily with information from BIOS just to hope that it
>> matches the motherboard stencil. *Furthermore*, there is no reason why
>> motherboard stencilAs are purely numeric... consider the rather obvious
>> case of two rows of four CPUs; they may have CPU slots labelled A1, A2,
>> A3, A4, B1, B2, B3, B4. It might very well be the right thing to
>> support arbitrary strings for platforms we recognize.
>
> Maintaining a manual mapping to strings in the kernel to such strings
> would be just crazy. You would need a new entry for basically
> every system.
>
> The reason to correct SOCKETID is that it it is output on errors.
> If it is numerical and you know it's wrong you can correct it,
> and then you can identify the right CPU. Otherwise you lose.
>
You're not making any sense. You seem to imply that restricting it to a
numerical ID makes it somehow easier, but it's *the same problem*.
-hpa
--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
--
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