[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e181933e-775a-4597-7700-9dde8b98295f@hygon.cn>
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2019 18:56:52 +0800
From: Pu Wen <puwen@...on.cn>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC: "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] x86/cpu/hygon: Fix phys_proc_id calculation logic for
multi-die processor
On 2019/3/23 16:59, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 23, 2019 at 10:13:39AM +0800, Pu Wen wrote:
>> Current physical id is computed via "phys_proc_id = initial_apicid >>
>> bits".
>>
>> For 4-Die 2 socket system, the physical id of socket 2 is:
>> initial_apicid >> bits = 0b1xxxxxx >> 6 = 1.
>> The result is true.
>>
>> But for 2-Die 2 socket system, the physical id of socket 2 is:
>> initial_apicid >> bits = 0b10xxxxx >> 5 = 2,
>> and for 1-Die 2 socket system, the physical id of socket 2 is:
>> initial_apicid >> bits = 0b100xxxx >> 4 = 4.
>> The results are not correct any more.
>>
>> So the adjustment for the 1-Die/2-Die 2 socket system is needed.
>> And just use ApicId[6], which already defined the right thing, as the
>> socket ID.
>
> I understand all that. But let me repeat my question:
>
> So why do you need to do something different than what AMD does?
>
> You said you're programming the initial APIC ID the same as AMD. So why
> doesn't this need to be changed in AMD code too but only for hygon?
Because AMD doesn't have 2-Socket system with 1-Die/2-Die processors(see
reference [2]). So it will return the right result when getting physical
ID in AMD system.
[2] https://www.amd.com/en/products/specifications/processors
--
Regards,
Pu Wen
Powered by blists - more mailing lists