[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/acpi: don't ignore I/O APICs just because there's no local APIC

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>]

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

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel