[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100721172428.GS26154@erda.amd.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 19:24:28 +0200
From: Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>
To: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
CC: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] x86, xsave: some code cleanups and reworks
On 21.07.10 13:17:18, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:11:56AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > On 07/21/2010 10:01 AM, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> > >
> > > Peter, also I think such tuning must be done at merge window time only,
> > > just to not break other's patch queues.
> > >
> >
> > Realistically it should be done right after the merge window for the
> > *next* merge window.
> >
> > -hpa
> >
>
> ok, which means Robert should use old conventional test at the moment
> instead of introducing is_boot_cpu I suppose.
Yes, I am just using:
if (!smp_processor_id())
...
Cyrill, if you like, I will leave it up to you to introduce the
is_boot_cpu() macro.
I still have patch 7/7 in my new posting in that removes the
boot_cpu_id. If your patch comes soon this will be obsolete as all
places will have the macro then.
Thanks,
-Robert
--
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Operating System Research Center
--
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