This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-devel] Re: Partial workaround for probs with 3ware Controller

To: Ian Pratt <Ian.Pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: Partial workaround for probs with 3ware Controller
From: Nuno Silva <nuno.silva@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 02:45:18 +0100
Cc: sven.kretzschmar@xxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 02:47:05 +0100
Envelope-to: steven.hand@xxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <E1BvmOm-0007ZS-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum=xen-devel>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-id: List for Xen developers <xen-devel.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <E1BvmOm-0007ZS-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040528 Thunderbird/0.6 Mnenhy/
Ian Pratt wrote:
Can xen hackers confirm if the acpi code is up-to-date?

The current acpi/apic code is around 2.4.22 vintage, which is
after most of the nasty bios table parsing problems.

It probably wouldn't hurt to freshen it, though.
Any volunteers?

Not me. I can't (won't) ruin a good project like xen :-)

Anyway, maybe if all the cpus are detected the current code will work (an upgrade is still the better way...).

Just edit xeno-unstable.bk/xen/include/asm-x86/config.h and change:
"#define NR_CPUS 16" to
"#define NR_CPUS 160".

This will waste some memory for some structs but it shouldn't hurt, YMMV.

Doing a diff from mpparse.c in xen and 2.6 demonstrates that the method to find if the processor is invalid or not has changed:
@@ -987,7 +836,7 @@
        struct mpc_config_processor processor;
        int                     boot_cpu = 0;
-       if (id >= MAX_APICS) {
+       if (MAX_APICS - id <= 0) {
                printk(KERN_WARNING "Processor #%d invalid (max %d)\n",
                        id, MAX_APICS);

Also, 2.6 acpi code works better in some boxen. Maybe because it's more bleeding edge?

Nuno Silva

SF.Net email is sponsored by Shop4tech.com-Lowest price on Blank Media
100pk Sonic DVD-R 4x for only $29 -100pk Sonic DVD+R for only $33
Save 50% off Retail on Ink & Toner - Free Shipping and Free Gift.
Xen-devel mailing list