[Bugme-new] [Bug 41402] New: Failure to boot CPU core - dmesg shows "CPU1: Not responding."

bugzilla-daemon at bugzilla.kernel.org bugzilla-daemon at bugzilla.kernel.org
Fri Aug 19 14:45:38 PDT 2011


https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41402

           Summary: Failure to boot CPU core - dmesg shows "CPU1: Not
                    responding."
           Product: Platform Specific/Hardware
           Version: 2.5
    Kernel Version: 3.1.0-rc2
          Platform: All
        OS/Version: Linux
              Tree: Mainline
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P1
         Component: i386
        AssignedTo: platform_i386 at kernel-bugs.osdl.org
        ReportedBy: john.skelton at gmx.com
        Regression: No


Created an attachment (id=69432)
 --> (https://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=69432)
dmesg output

I have an Intel Core 2 Duo T5750 2.0Ghz on which 32-bit and
64-bit kernels fail to boot CPU #1.  (Annoyingly, Vista is fine.)

This problem is present in kernel 3.1.0-rc2 and all kernels tried
(at least back to 2.6.24.4).

Attached is data from dmesg, acpidump & mptable.

I wondered if this was an ACPI or MP table problem but believe not.

They looked OK to me so I adapted a standalone program (to be
grub-bootable) which uses the Intel example way of booting (an APIC
INIT IPI followed by STARTUP IPI twice, sent using broadcast to all
except self).  This works, so next I hacked arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c's
wakeup_secondary_cpu_via_init to use the same way - which also works.

The relevant Intel manuals appear to include the "Intel 64 and IA-32
Architectures Software Developer's Manual Vol 3A", Chapter 8, and
"x86 System Programming Guide", Chapter 7.

I would be grateful for contact from anyone with ideas or with
knowledge of why smpboot.c is structured as it is instead of using
Intel's algorithm.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.


More information about the Bugme-new mailing list