From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Aug 27 22:03:35 2010
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 105C81065673;
	Fri, 27 Aug 2010 22:03:35 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from jkim@FreeBSD.org)
From: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org>
To: Andriy Gapon <avg@icyb.net.ua>
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 18:03:24 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2
References: <201007141414.o6EEEUx9014690@lurza.secnetix.de>
	<201008271615.58056.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
	<4C781DDB.1080903@icyb.net.ua>
In-Reply-To: <4C781DDB.1080903@icyb.net.ua>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201008271803.27295.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: 8.1-PRERELEASE: CPU packages not detected correctly
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 22:03:35 -0000

On Friday 27 August 2010 04:19 pm, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> I still don't get your point.
> My point is that if the Intel's code gets the topology right, then
> the hardware is emulated properly and the problem is with the
> patch.
> What is your point? :)

My point is "right" topology means nothing in this context if CPU 
affinity of guest OS does not reflect hypervisor's point of view.

Jung-uk Kim