From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 24 03:04:45 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB98716A4CE; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 03:04:45 +0000 (GMT) Received: from lexi.siliconlandmark.com (lexi.siliconlandmark.com [209.69.98.4]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A6A243D2F; Sun, 24 Apr 2005 03:04:45 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from andy@siliconlandmark.com) Received: from lexi.siliconlandmark.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) j3O34cXP004372; Sat, 23 Apr 2005 23:04:38 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from andy@siliconlandmark.com) Received: from localhost (andy@localhost)j3O34bMH004369; Sat, 23 Apr 2005 23:04:38 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from andy@siliconlandmark.com) X-Authentication-Warning: lexi.siliconlandmark.com: andy owned process doing -bs Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 23:04:37 -0400 (EDT) From: Andre Guibert de Bruet To: Matthew Sullivan In-Reply-To: <426B06F5.3030506@uq.edu.au> Message-ID: <20050423224317.D68772@lexi.siliconlandmark.com> References: <4267A1CF.3080903@uq.edu.au> <20050422190208.M68772@lexi.siliconlandmark.com> <426A20E5.5020604@uq.edu.au><426B06F5.3030506@uq.edu.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-SL-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-SL-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-2.539, required 6, autolearn=not spam, AWL 0.06, BAYES_00 -2.60) X-MailScanner-From: andy@siliconlandmark.com cc: njl@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SMP on Compaq DL380 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 03:04:45 -0000 On Sun, 24 Apr 2005, Matthew Sullivan wrote: > Andre Guibert de Bruet wrote: > >> Processors: APIC ID Version State Family Model Step >> Flags >> 0 0x10 BSP, usable 6 2 1 0x0381 >> 0 0x10 AP, usable 6 8 6 0x383fbff >> >> The APIC IDs here are the same. The flags on the would-be AP are what I >> would expect for a recent i686. The BSP barely qualify it to be a gen-1 >> Pentium. I wouldn't trust any of the values being reported. Could you >> obtain the real identity of these CPUs and confirm that they're not >> mismatched? The easy way of doing this if your BIOS doesn't post this >> information is using a Knoppix LiveCD and doing a cat /proc/cpuinfo. > > Ok can't do the knoppix thing atm, however... > > CPU0 -> 866/256/133/1.65v SL47S > CPU1 -> 866/256/133/1.70v SL48V > > Both are shown detected by the BIOS, and both are shown as 866MHz 133MHz > busses, and 256k cache (as one would expect) > >> If both CPUs are reporting the same ID, I can see how we're not launching >> the second proc; We assume that ID 0 is the BSP and additional processors >> have different APIC IDs. Is something really borked here? Yep! > > But the acpidump -t shows 2 different ID's.... I don't know the way our ACPI implementation handles the information found in the tables well enough to be able to tell you exactly what we do with the IDs that are found in that dump. That's Nate Lawson's domain (I added him to the CC-list). >From your dmesg, it doesn't even appear that we're seeing the second CPU listed in your DSDT. There is only one reference of: cpu: on acpi0 Andy | Andre Guibert de Bruet | Enterprise Software Consultant > | Silicon Landmark, LLC. | http://siliconlandmark.com/ >