Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, x86@kernel.org,
        Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Wei Liu <wei.liu@kernel.org>,
        Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 41/58] x86/apic: Add max_apic_id member
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wjkmwJB4puU7dn0eTABXGa7WdX=JZFZjqxOEkiA3f+aGQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20230717223049.327865981@linutronix.de>
 <20230717223225.515238528@linutronix.de>
 <CAHk-=wh9sDpbCPCekRr-fgWYz=9xa0_BOkEa+5vOr9Co-fNhrQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <87h6q1y82v.ffs@tglx>
 <CAHk-=wjkmwJB4puU7dn0eTABXGa7WdX=JZFZjqxOEkiA3f+aGQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 18 Jul 2023 20:59:46 +0200
Message-ID: <87351lxcyl.ffs@tglx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jul 18 2023 at 09:06, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jul 2023 at 00:47, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
>>
>> The confusing part here is the physical APIC ID vs. the destination
>> mode.
>
> Actually, no, what confused me here ended up being that I didn't see
> any other limit checking at all for the flat mode, and then I was
> "this cannot possibly work up to that limit".
>
> But it turns out that the limit checking appears to be in the
> "physflat" case, not in the simple flat case.
>
> IOW, the physflat probe function says "I'll take it" whenever
> num_possible_cpus() > 8", and that seems to be what then limits the
> flat mode to a max of 8 cpus. So the limit was just in another place
> than I expected.

Right. And obviously you managed to confuse me too :)