[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101223043015.GA13976@shaohui>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 12:30:15 +0800
From: Shaohui Zheng <shaohui.zheng@...ux.intel.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: shaohui.zheng@...el.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, haicheng.li@...ux.intel.com,
lethal@...ux-sh.org, ak@...ux.intel.com, rientjes@...gle.com,
dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, gregkh@...e.de,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
Yinghai Lu <Yinghai.Lu@....COM>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Haicheng Li <haicheng.li@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [5/7, v9] NUMA Hotplug Emulator: Support cpu probe/release in
x86_64
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 09:28:04PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Dec 2010 10:24:28 +0800 Shaohui Zheng <shaohui.zheng@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> > >
> > > Why *does* it check `count' and then not use it?
> > >
> >
> > it is a tricky thing. When I debug it under a Virtual Machine, If I do a cpu
> > probe via sysfs cpu/probe interface, The function arch_cpu_probe will be called
> > __three__ times, but only one call is valid, so I add a check on `count` to
> > ignore the invalid calls.
>
> hm, why does it get called three times? Is that something which
> can/should be fixed in callers rather than in the callee?
It might be a bug in the caller, but just guess currently. I will investigate it.
--
Thanks & Regards,
Shaohui
--
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