[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1196110666.6352.309.camel@bodhitayantram.eng.vmware.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 12:57:46 -0800
From: Zachary Amsden <zach@...are.com>
To: Yinghai Lu <Yinghai.Lu@....COM>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_64: not set boot cpu in cpu_online_map at
smp_prepare_boot_cpu
On Mon, 2007-11-26 at 00:38 -0800, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> [PATCH] x86_64: not set boot cpu in cpu_online_map at smp_prepare_boot_cpu
>
> in init/main.c boot_cpu_init() does that before
>
> Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai.lu@....com>
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot_64.c b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot_64.c
> index 500670c..966d124 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot_64.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot_64.c
> @@ -912,7 +912,7 @@ void __init smp_prepare_cpus(unsigned int max_cpus)
> void __init smp_prepare_boot_cpu(void)
> {
> int me = smp_processor_id();
> - cpu_set(me, cpu_online_map);
> + /* already set me in cpu_online_map in boot_cpu_init() */
> cpu_set(me, cpu_callout_map);
> per_cpu(cpu_state, me) = CPU_ONLINE;
> }
This ordering can be tricky wrt CPU hotplug. Are you sure you are not
breaking CPU hotplug? AFAIK, x86_64 has that right and the 32-bit code
had it wrong.
Zach
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists