This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-devel] dom0 and apicid not equal to cpuid

To: "Langsdorf, Mark" <mark.langsdorf@xxxxxxx>, <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] dom0 and apicid not equal to cpuid
From: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2008 21:22:40 +0000
Delivery-date: Fri, 08 Feb 2008 13:22:27 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <C3D277EB.13857%Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: Achqll4p+tddFVOYTAK5v3h066MrkQAAfHYmAAAa+Yg=
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] dom0 and apicid not equal to cpuid
User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/
On 8/2/08 21:19, "Keir Fraser" <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> I know some of the code needs to be added to mpparse-xen.c,
>> but it looks like the relevant code was #ifdef'd out in
>> the first place.  Does anyone know why the code to match
>> cpuids to apicids was removed and what would need to be
>> done to restore it?
> Probably most of the things that depend on it are actually managed by Xen
> itself. Possibly this assumption is wrong and the code needs to be re-added,
> or perhaps the problem is actually within Xen?
> Can you point out the specific troubling code in our Linux tree (e.g., the
> specific #if0'ed code, and also the place where the kernel ultimately gets
> confused and the request fails)?

Also, a link to the upstream patch, or area of code in an upstream kernel,
that you think needs to be added would be useful too.

 -- Keir

Xen-devel mailing list