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:     Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc:     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>,
        Michael Kelley <mikelley@microsoft.com>,
        Peter Keresztes Schmidt <peter@keresztesschmidt.de>,
        "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [patch V2 16/58] x86/apic: Sanitize num_processors handling
In-Reply-To: <87y1iwnt34.ffs@tglx>
References: <20230724131206.500814398@linutronix.de>
 <20230724132045.555787669@linutronix.de>
 <d232e50f-01fc-ef2e-db29-3f790d960c0e@suse.com> <87y1iwnt34.ffs@tglx>
Date:   Mon, 31 Jul 2023 17:57:13 +0200
Message-ID: <87mszcnkfa.ffs@tglx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jul 31 2023 at 14:50, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Why can't XENPV pretend that it has a smp configuration detected,
> i.e. setting smp_found_config as any other special get_smp_config()
> implementation does?

The below should do the trick, no?


--- a/arch/x86/xen/smp_pv.c
+++ b/arch/x86/xen/smp_pv.c
@@ -182,7 +182,8 @@ static void __init _get_smp_config(unsig
 	if (subtract)
 		set_nr_cpu_ids(nr_cpu_ids - subtract);
 #endif
-
+	/* Pretend to be a proper enumerated system */
+	smp_found_config = 1;
 }
 
 static void __init xen_pv_smp_prepare_boot_cpu(void)