On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 12:04 AM, Segher Boessenkool <[email protected]> wrote: >>> You should be able to see which interfaces are enabled in some CPC925 >>> register, >>> but maybe both _are_ enabled on your system (although one is not >>> connected), >>> which is causing the errors? >> >> Hmm, I dont't think this is the case: I'm using a MapleD board with two >> CPUs >> connected to separate PIs. However I can slect the service processor >> to enable only one CPU via selecting correct bootscript. In this case >> bootscript correctly enables only APIMASK_ADI0. However as cpc925_edac >> checks the APIEXCP itself, it sees the APIEXCP_ADI1 bit set and spills >> regular warnings about it (see below). > > (no below :-) )
Sorry, here it goes: EDAC CPC925: Processor Interface Fault Processor Interface register dump: EDAC CPC925: APIMASK 0xdea00000 EDAC CPC925: APIEXCP 0x20000000 EDAC DEVICE0: INTERNAL ERROR: instance 0 'block' out of range (0 >= 0) > I think the service processor left that processor interface enabled (the > interface itself, not the exception stuff), so the exception thing will > signal exceptions any time the CPC925 sends snoops to that second > processor. This also might reduce performance. > > Or maybe it is normal for the exception thing to signal errors on disabled > interfaces. I only have U4 manual, so I can't be sure about U3H. And for U4 manual is also unclear about ADI1 exception. >> If you'd prefer I can add a check for APIMASK at cpc925_cpu_init() time, >> but I think that this will be less robust. > > Yeah that's less robust, for sure. > > Just keep what you have, but add a big fat comment that you are assuming > the processor interface id is identical to the MPIC processor id :-) sure > Did you test disabling physical CPU #0 as well? No. I still don't have _that_ level of understanding of PIBS boot scripts. -- With best wishes Dmitry _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
