Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757538AbYHUM6R (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Aug 2008 08:58:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753301AbYHUM6D (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Aug 2008 08:58:03 -0400 Received: from kirk.serum.com.pl ([213.77.9.205]:64567 "EHLO serum.com.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753190AbYHUM6B (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Aug 2008 08:58:01 -0400 Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 13:57:24 +0100 (BST) From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" To: Vegard Nossum cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Frans Pop , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andi Kleen , Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: 2.6.27-rc3: 'APIC error on CPU1: 00(40)', but only on resume! In-Reply-To: <19f34abd0808210520q60357776xbfcf288018e04161@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: References: <200808202106.41058.elendil@planet.nl> <200808202138.13302.rjw@sisk.pl> <200808202226.45655.elendil@planet.nl> <200808202356.33036.rjw@sisk.pl> <19f34abd0808210418w39341d05p43712356b352cdc9@mail.gmail.com> <19f34abd0808210520q60357776xbfcf288018e04161@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1607 Lines: 40 On Thu, 21 Aug 2008, Vegard Nossum wrote: > Ah, right. Here is a dump of the LVT registers: > > [00000320] = 000100ef > [00000330] = 00000200 > [00000340] = 00010000 > [00000350] = 00010700 > [00000360] = 00000400 > [00000370] = 000000fe > > Maybe I've misunderstood something (again), but should those vectors > really be 0 for 330-360? (At least 330 + 360, which are not masked.) Masked entries should be fine long-term, although I have a vague recollection at least some implementations do send a vector error when an LVT register is written with a masked entry implying an invalid vector, e.g. a value like 0x00010000. Overall the issue of the validity of the vector exists for interrupts using the native APIC priority model only, that is ones using the Fixed and LoPri delivery modes. All the others either ignore the vector altogether, such as the ExtINTA delivery mode, or assign a special meaning to it, such as the StartUp mode. In this case the thermal entry at 0x330 uses the SMI delivery mode and the LINT1 entry at 0x360 uses the NMI mode, so the vector is ignored for both. Thus this LVT is entirely valid and if you receive invalid vector interrupts, then the reason must be elsewhere. Of course you cannot exclude a possibility where at some intermediate stage the LVT of your system has not been correctly initialised. Maciej -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/