Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753501Ab0FCGvp (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Jun 2010 02:51:45 -0400 Received: from mail-bw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.214.46]:40741 "EHLO mail-bw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751054Ab0FCGvn convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Jun 2010 02:51:43 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=NmttxaHAfhxGyRV9C9RBk2NIaq/55Czh4RG+8AEjPCT2KNpmNSKa8ZtWN0QS1Vup+M gqw2bNbkTA1CyTTo3FP9U8mYbFnSr1I2fAtgG4ZX1JzH5fpnJWhEiCn8Xm5N4JbT5jIH ZtH/4F74uUfeLxFIFkSkSpy0vpirc88eFjQOw= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20100531165528.35a323fb.rdunlap@xenotime.net> <4C047CF9.9000804@tmr.com> <20100601123959.747228c6.rdunlap@xenotime.net> Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 09:51:41 +0300 X-Google-Sender-Auth: ErOvKgQZOR0hGRtNzJwuDAcJyDQ Message-ID: Subject: Re: Possible bug in 2.6.34 slub From: Pekka Enberg To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Randy Dunlap , Giangiacomo Mariotti , Bill Davidsen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, x86 maintainers , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1739 Lines: 36 On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 10:48 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Tue, 1 Jun 2010, Randy Dunlap wrote: > >> > >>> My cpu is an I7 920, so it has 4 cores and there's hyperthreading >> > >>> enabled, so there are 8 logical cpus. Is this a bug? > > Yes its a bug in the arch code or BIOS. The system configuration tells us > that there are more possible cpus and therefore the system prepares for > the additional cpus to be activated at some later time. I guess we should CC x86 maintainers then! >> Sorry, I think that I misread your report. >> It does look like misinformation. >> Let's cc Christoph Lameter & Pekka. >> >> >> > The point is, I guess(didn't actually look at the code), if that's >> > just the count of MAX number of cpus supported, which is a config time >> > ?define and then the actual count gets refined afterwards by slub >> > too(because I know that the rest of the kernel knows I've got 4 >> > cores/8 logical cpus) or not. Is that it? If this is not the case(that >> > is, it's not a static define used as a MAX value), then I can't see >> > what kind of boot/init time info it is. If it's a boot-time info, it >> > just means it's a _wrong_ boot-time info. > > No that is the max nr of cpus possible on this machine. The count is > determined by hardware capabilities on bootup. If they are not detected > in the right way then you have the erroneous display (and the system > configures useless per cpu structures to support nonexistent cpus). -- 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/