On Mon, 18 May 2009 11:33:52 +0200 Kurt Garloff <garloff@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, > > ACPI specification says that the OS must disregard reserved bits. > The x86_64 SRAT parser does not discard the upper 24 bits of the > proximity_domain (pxm) in the acpi_srat_mem_affinity entries for > SRAT v1 tables. (v2 has 32 bits wide fields.) > This can lead to problems with poor BIOS implementations that failed > to set resreved bytes to zero. (The ACPI spec is a bit vague here > unfortunately.) > > This was also inconsistent: On x86-64 (srat_64.c), the > _cpu_affinity does only use the low 8 bits of pxm, while the > full 32 bits of _mem_affinity are consumed. > In srat_32.c (x86), only 8bits are used (which is OK, a 32bit system > with >256 PXMs does not seem reasonable at all). > On ia64, the support of more than 8 bits was consistent between > mem and cpu affinity entries, however it dependent on "sn2" platform. > > The patch series has the following goals: > * Make the kernel support consistently 8bits or 32bits for the > proximity domain > * Make this dependent on the SRAT version; v1 => 8bits, v2 => 32bits. > > Overview over the patches: > - [1/3] Store the SRAT table version value in acpi_srat_revision > - [2/3] x86-64: Discard the upper 24 bits in mem_affinity if rev <= 1 > and use upper 24bits in cpu_affinity if rev >= 2 > - [3/3] ia64: Also use upper 8/24bits if rev >= 2 (but leave logic to > enable on sn2 as well -- I don't know if sn2 reports v1 or v2 > SRAT) Also add two __init decls in ia64 pxm accessors. > Did this patchset get lost or something? I don't see it anywhere, not even in the ACPI 'testing' tree... -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
