[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1005170052350.3368@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 00:57:13 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>
cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/8] x86/apbt: support more timer configurations on
mrst
On Fri, 14 May 2010, Jacob Pan wrote:
>
> -int disable_apbt_percpu __cpuinitdata;
> -
> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct apbt_dev, cpu_apbt_dev);
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> @@ -204,9 +203,9 @@ static inline int __init setup_x86_mrst_timer(char *arg)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> if (strcmp("apbt_only", arg) == 0)
> - disable_apbt_percpu = 0;
> + mrst_timer_options = MRST_TIMER_APBT_ONLY;
> else if (strcmp("lapic_and_apbt", arg) == 0)
> - disable_apbt_percpu = 1;
> + mrst_timer_options = MRST_TIMER_LAPIC_APBT;
You changed the selection from disable_apbt_percpu to
mrst_timer_options in the previous patch and now you change the
command line options to take effect.
That means the previous patch is not testable by itself. Neither is
the current one, so there is no point in having separate
patches. Please fold them into one.
Thanks,
tglx
--
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