[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87mszcnkfa.ffs@tglx>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2023 17:57:13 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Wei Liu <wei.liu@...nel.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
Michael Kelley <mikelley@...rosoft.com>,
Peter Keresztes Schmidt <peter@...esztesschmidt.de>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [patch V2 16/58] x86/apic: Sanitize num_processors handling
On Mon, Jul 31 2023 at 14:50, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Why can't XENPV pretend that it has a smp configuration detected,
> i.e. setting smp_found_config as any other special get_smp_config()
> implementation does?
The below should do the trick, no?
--- a/arch/x86/xen/smp_pv.c
+++ b/arch/x86/xen/smp_pv.c
@@ -182,7 +182,8 @@ static void __init _get_smp_config(unsig
if (subtract)
set_nr_cpu_ids(nr_cpu_ids - subtract);
#endif
-
+ /* Pretend to be a proper enumerated system */
+ smp_found_config = 1;
}
static void __init xen_pv_smp_prepare_boot_cpu(void)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists