[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B7C98B9.1090903@zytor.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2010 17:32:41 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 34/35] x86: use num_processors for possible cpus
On 02/10/2010 01:20 AM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> some systems that have disable cpus entries because same
> BIOS will support 2 sockets and 4 sockets and more at
> same time, BIOS just leave some disable entries, but
> those system do not support cpu hotplug. we don't need
> treat disabled_cpus as hotplug cpus.
> so we can make nr_cpu_ids smaller and save more space
> (pcpu data allocations), and could make some systems run
> with logical flat instead of physical flat apic mode
>
> -v2: change to black list instead
> -v3: just remove that, and the one use possible_cpus= directly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
I'm confused by this one. This would seem to mean that unless you're
specifying possible_cpus= then you are not treating anything as
hotpluggable.
This is clearly wrong, and it would appear to go the wrong direction in
terms of what is safe.
What am I missing here?
-hpa
--
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