Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there'sno local APIC

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

On 06/12/09 13:11, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> just for the record -- this removement has a side effect.
> Imagine I've passed "disableapic" so I expect as many as
> possible apic-related code would not pass thru execution.
> Now we would have (say for IBM Summit)
>
> acpi_parse_madt
>    default_acpi_madt_oem_check
>      summit_acpi_madt_oem_check
>        mark_tsc_unstable
>        setup_summit
>
> Dunno if it harmless or no but it changes kernel behaviour.
> cpu_has_apic cleared if disableapic option (which is early
> param) passed to kernel.
>
> Just a note. Didn't walk thru all ways.
>    

Yeah, that occured to me over the weekend.  Some of those cpu_has_apic 
tests should probably be replaced with explicit tests to see if noapic 
was specified.  I'll go over it with that in mind.

Thanks,
    J
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/