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".
--
Andriy Gapon
_______________________________________________
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"
