On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 04:44:09PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> On 12/09/2016 12:39, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 04, 2016 at 08:14:07PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> >
> >> On 04/09/2016 19:29, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> >>> This is possible, of course. But it would not affect "SMP: Added CPU ..."
> >>> lines.
> >>
> >> Well, looking at the code it seems that only if mptable is used, then those
> >> lines are expected to correctly identify a BSP. With MADT there is no
> >> information to identify the BSP and that is supposed to happen in
> >> cpu_mp_start().
> >>
> >>
> >> static void
> >> madt_add_cpu(u_int acpi_id, u_int apic_id, u_int flags)
> >> {
> >> struct lapic_info *la;
> >>
> >> /*
> >> * The MADT does not include a BSP flag, so we have to let the
> >> * MP code figure out which CPU is the BSP on its own.
> >> */
> >> ...
> >>
> >> In other words, those "SMP: Added CPU ..." are truly a cosmetic issue.
> >> And it's my guess (just a guess) that BSP LAPIC ID is incorrect in the
> >> problematic configuration.
> >
> > For next day or two I am have new server with same hardware before put
> > in prodution.
> > Can I do some test for you?
> >
>
> >From my earlier email:
> "my guess can be checked by adding a printf to cpu_mp_start() right after
> boot_cpu_id assignment".
I am not kernel developer: please point what I am need insert and file
for edit.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
