Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1460258 > unrolled thread

Re: [Patch v3 2/2] x86/acpi: Remove the repeated lapic address override entry parsing

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [Patch v3 2/2] x86/acpi: Remove the repeated lapic address  override entry parsing Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2016-08-11 10:40 +0200
    Re: [Patch v3 2/2] x86/acpi: Remove the repeated lapic address  override entry parsing Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com> - 2016-08-11 16:30 +0200

#1460258 — Re: [Patch v3 2/2] x86/acpi: Remove the repeated lapic address override entry parsing

* Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com> wrote:

> On 08/10/16 at 04:02pm, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > * Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > ACPI MADT has a 32-bit field providing lapic address at which
> > > each processor can access its lapic information. MADT also contains
> > > an optional entry to provide a 64-bit address to override the 32-bit
> > > one. However the current code does the lapic address override entry
> > > parsing twice. One is in early_acpi_boot_init() because AMD NUMA need
> > > get boot_cpu_id earlier. The other is in acpi_boot_init() which parses
> > > all MADT entries.
> > > 
> > > So in this patch remove the repeated code in the 2nd part. Meanwhile
> > > print lapic override entry information like other MADT entry, this
> > > will be added to boot log.
> > 
> > it is not at all clear to me from this changelog whether the change is supposed to 
> > change anything. If not then please spell it out explicitly:
> > 
> >   "This patch is not supposed to change any behavior."
> 
> I don't know if adding new information to boot log can be seen as
> behavior change. If lapic override entry exist, the code change will
> add one line of message to boot log:
> 
> 	LAPIC_ADDR_OVR (address[0xXXXXXXXX])
> 
> If this is not behavior change, I will add the sentence you suggested.

Yeah, you can write it:

	"This patch is not supposed to change any runtime behavior, other than 
	 improving kernel messages."

Thanks,

	Ingo

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1460571

On 08/11/16 at 10:37am, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > On 08/10/16 at 04:02pm, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > 
> > > * Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > ACPI MADT has a 32-bit field providing lapic address at which
> > > > each processor can access its lapic information. MADT also contains
> > > > an optional entry to provide a 64-bit address to override the 32-bit
> > > > one. However the current code does the lapic address override entry
> > > > parsing twice. One is in early_acpi_boot_init() because AMD NUMA need
> > > > get boot_cpu_id earlier. The other is in acpi_boot_init() which parses
> > > > all MADT entries.
> > > > 
> > > > So in this patch remove the repeated code in the 2nd part. Meanwhile
> > > > print lapic override entry information like other MADT entry, this
> > > > will be added to boot log.
> > > 
> > > it is not at all clear to me from this changelog whether the change is supposed to 
> > > change anything. If not then please spell it out explicitly:
> > > 
> > >   "This patch is not supposed to change any behavior."
> > 
> > I don't know if adding new information to boot log can be seen as
> > behavior change. If lapic override entry exist, the code change will
> > add one line of message to boot log:
> > 
> > 	LAPIC_ADDR_OVR (address[0xXXXXXXXX])
> > 
> > If this is not behavior change, I will add the sentence you suggested.
> 
> Yeah, you can write it:
> 
> 	"This patch is not supposed to change any runtime behavior, other than 
> 	 improving kernel messages."

Got it, will copy this to patch log and repost. Thanks a lot!

Thanks
Baoquan

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web