[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1105171502190.3078@ionos>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 15:02:32 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
cc: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
"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
On Tue, 17 May 2011, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * 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.
Ditto.
--
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