[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110517122836.GA14758@elte.hu>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 14:28:36 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>
Cc: "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
"steiner@....com" <steiner@....com>,
"yinghai@...nel.org" <yinghai@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"gorcunov@...nvz.org" <gorcunov@...nvz.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 1/5] x84_64, apic: Use probe routines to simplify apic
selection
* Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 01:08 -0700, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > Ok, looks like a step forward in the right direction.
> >
> > Wouldnt it be more self-contained if the probe function returned an apic driver
> > pointer?
> >
> > We could add an __apicdriver section trick to 'know' about all APIC probing
> > functions - and we'd call them one by one and use the first one that returns a
> > non-NULL result.
> >
> > Then we'd have the generic fallback APIC drivers as well - not marked
> > __apicdriver but used by the probe function directly.
> >
> > Or we could have them as __apicdriver as well, but then the .o link ordering
> > matters to probing order.
> >
>
> So how does something like the appended look? There are multiple apic
> driver routines and apic name string that is being looked at by the
> generic code. So I exported the struct apic * using the section trick.
>
> Untested for now. If you are ok, then I will post with a better
> changelog.
Yeah, this looks very nice to me.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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