| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just becaus
|
To: |
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@xxxxxxxxx> |
|
Subject: |
[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC |
|
From: |
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx> |
|
Date: |
Sun, 14 Jun 2009 19:01:16 -0700 |
|
Cc: |
Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@xxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Delivery-date: |
Sun, 14 Jun 2009 19:01:57 -0700 |
|
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
In-reply-to: |
<20090612201117.GA29923@lenovo> |
|
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/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe> |
|
List-unsubscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
|
References: |
<4A329CF8.4050502@xxxxxxxx> <20090612201117.GA29923@lenovo> |
|
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1b3pre) Gecko/20090513 Fedora/3.0-2.3.beta2.fc11 Thunderbird/3.0b2 |
On 06/12/09 13:11, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
just for the record -- this removement has a side effect.
Imagine I've passed "disableapic" so I expect as many as
possible apic-related code would not pass thru execution.
Now we would have (say for IBM Summit)
acpi_parse_madt
default_acpi_madt_oem_check
summit_acpi_madt_oem_check
mark_tsc_unstable
setup_summit
Dunno if it harmless or no but it changes kernel behaviour.
cpu_has_apic cleared if disableapic option (which is early
param) passed to kernel.
Just a note. Didn't walk thru all ways.
Yeah, that occured to me over the weekend. Some of those cpu_has_apic
tests should probably be replaced with explicit tests to see if noapic
was specified. I'll go over it with that in mind.
Thanks,
J
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
| <Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC, Eric W. Biederman
[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC, Cyrill Gorcunov
- [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <=
Message not available
- [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC, Jeremy Fitzhardinge
- [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC, Eric W. Biederman
- [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC, Jeremy Fitzhardinge
- [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC, Eric W. Biederman
- [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC, Jeremy Fitzhardinge
- [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC, Eric W. Biederman
- [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC, Jeremy Fitzhardinge
- RE: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC, Nakajima, Jun
- Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC, Keir Fraser
- Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC, Eric W. Biederman
|
|
|
| |
|
Home