From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 16 11:59:59 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AB0437B401 for ; Wed, 16 Jul 2003 11:59:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.speakeasy.net (mail16.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.216]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E79EF43FAF for ; Wed, 16 Jul 2003 11:59:58 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 16792 invoked from network); 16 Jul 2003 18:59:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO server.baldwin.cx) ([216.27.160.63]) (envelope-sender )encrypted SMTP for ; 16 Jul 2003 18:59:58 -0000 Received: from laptop.baldwin.cx (gw1.twc.weather.com [216.133.140.1]) by server.baldwin.cx (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h6GIxuGI023507; Wed, 16 Jul 2003 14:59:56 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.5.4 on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 15:00:12 -0400 (EDT) From: John Baldwin To: "Cagle, John (ISS-Houston)" cc: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org cc: Patrik Veselik Subject: RE: maximum of CPUs X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 18:59:59 -0000 On 16-Jul-2003 Cagle, John (ISS-Houston) wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: John Baldwin [mailto:jhb@FreeBSD.org] >> On 15-Jul-2003 Cagle, John (ISS-Houston) wrote: > >> > -- >> > I/O APICs: APIC ID Version State Address >> > 8 0x11 usable 0xfec00000 >> > 9 0x11 usable 0xfec01000 >> > 10 0x11 usable 0xfec02000 >> > >> > Is this what you would expect to see on an 8-way server >> that supports >> > hyperthreading? >> >> Ugh, I would hope that the APIC ID's wouldn't collide with CPUs. :( >> Note that you have real CPU's at ID's 8 and 10 and a logical one at >> 9. Currently my code doesn't renumber APIC ID's to try to cope with >> this type of case. Does the ACPI MADT table report the same values >> for the APIC ID's of the I/O APICs? > > I should have updated my BIOS before trying this out. Sure enough, this > was a BIOS bug that was corrected in March. The I/O APICS are now > numbered 16, 17 & 18 so as to not collide with processor's local APICS. > (Looks like the original BIOS only accounted for processors 0..7, > without hyperthreading.) Ok, good. > However, even with the properly renumbered IOAPICs, I still get the same > panic: "No free physical APIC IDs found". This is still expected with the current code. > I'm going to add some debug messages and track this down further. I'll > let you know if I find anything. I'll also check the MADT to see if it > jives with everything else. Tor's suggestion to bump up NAPICID to 256 might help. -- John Baldwin <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/