Re: assertion "lp_max >= core_max" failed

Christof Meerwald <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.os.netbsd.devel.kernel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Sun, Sep 22, 2024 at 03:57:59PM +0200, Christof Meerwald wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 22, 2024 at 01:08:21PM -0000, Michael van Elst wrote:
> > Wouldn't that tell that we only have 1 core / 1 thread ?
> 
> I am not sure - I am currently running NetBSD with that change and it
> has 2 CPU cores assigned and the 2 cores show up in /proc/cpuinfo and
> in dmesg:
> 
> [     1.000004] cpu0 at mainbus0 apid 0
> [     1.000004] cpu0: Use lfence to serialize rdtsc
> [     1.000004] cpu0: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2690 v4 @ 2.60GHz, id 0x406f1
> [     1.000004] cpu0: node 0, package 0, core 0, smt 0
> [     1.000004] cpu1 at mainbus0 apid 1
> [     1.000004] cpu1: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2690 v4 @ 2.60GHz, id 0x406f1
> [     1.000004] cpu1: node 0, package 1, core 0, smt 0

BTW, now setting lp_max = core_max in this case and now I get:

[     1.000004] cpu0 at mainbus0 apid 0
[     1.000004] cpu0: Use lfence to serialize rdtsc
[     1.000004] cpu0: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2690 v4 @ 2.60GHz, id 0x406f1
[     1.000004] cpu0: node 0, package 0, core 0, smt 0
[     1.000004] cpu1 at mainbus0 apid 1
[     1.000004] cpu1: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2690 v4 @ 2.60GHz, id 0x406f1
[     1.000004] cpu1: node 0, package 0, core 1, smt 0

Maybe that's actually slightly better.


Christof

-- 

https://cmeerw.org                             sip:cmeerw at cmeerw.org
mailto:cmeerw at cmeerw.org                   xmpp:cmeerw at cmeerw.org
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.