[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1342043432.16730.899.camel@misato.fc.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 15:50:32 -0600
From: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@...com>
To: imammedo@...hat.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, prarit@...hat.com, oleg@...hat.com,
rob@...dley.net, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
hpa@...or.com, x86@...nel.org, luto@....edu,
suresh.b.siddha@...el.com, avi@...hat.com, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
johnstul@...ibm.com, toshi.kani@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86: don't panic if master CPU haven't set
cpu_callout_mask
On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 14:22 -0600, Toshi Kani wrote:
> Gracefully cancel CPU initialization instead of panic when master
> CPU haven't managed to set cpu_callout_mask in time.
>
> Signed-off-by: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@...hat.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c | 3 ++-
> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
> index 95948b9..6470470 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
> @@ -175,8 +175,9 @@ static void __cpuinit smp_callin(void)
> }
>
> if (!time_before(jiffies, timeout)) {
> - panic("%s: CPU%d started up but did not get a callout!\n",
> + pr_debug("%s: CPU%d started up but did not get a callout!\n",
> __func__, cpuid);
Shouldn't we use pr_err() here?
> + goto die;
Is it safe to call remove_siblinginfo() in this code path? It has not
called set_cpu_sibling_map() yet.
Thanks,
-Toshi
> }
>
> /*
--
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