[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B02E354.9060102@zytor.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 09:54:28 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Mike Travis <travis@....com>
CC: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, mingo@...e.hu,
tglx@...utronix.de, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, rdreier@...co.com, rdunlap@...otime.net,
tj@...nel.org, andi@...stfloor.org, gregkh@...e.de,
yhlu.kernel@...il.com, rientjes@...gle.com, rostedt@...dmis.org,
rusty@...tcorp.com.au, seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com,
steiner@....com, fweisbec@...il.com, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] INIT: Limit the number of per cpu calibration bootup
messages
On 11/17/2009 09:49 AM, Mike Travis wrote:
>
> I'd like to say that, but Peter wanted it to become an inlined function
> return value, and there are too many references in too many arches to
> a scalar value, so that moves it out of the scope of this patch set.
>
Another thing: if we do a lot of testing for "are we running on the boot
CPU", an is_boot_cpu() or is_boot_cpu(cpu) function might be a nice
piece of syntactic sugar (and more immediately implementable.)
-hpa
--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
--
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