[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <516EFE41.4000605@zytor.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 12:55:45 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Robin Holt <holt@....com>
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Russ Anderson <rja@....com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v5 5/5] Make reboot_cpuid a kernel parameter.
On 04/17/2013 12:48 PM, Robin Holt wrote:
>
> Did you see my response I sent this morning?
>
I did not, although I just read it.
I have a hard time seeing maintaining backwards/forwards compatibility
as "very wrong" ... it would seem like a pretty major concern. In
comparison losing the currently nonexistent /sys file seems like a
rather minor issue.
My suggestion would be to have a universal parser for reboot= and have
the arch functions fed data in already parsed form.
> I would really like to try and remove the apparently unused reboot=
> parameter from arm and unicore32 as well. Does anybody have a concern
> with that? That should make documenting slightly easier.
You have to ask the arm and unicore32 maintainers that, obviously.
>> Furthermore that word "cpuid" that you keep using, I don't think it
>> means what you think it means...
>
> If we stayed with the core_param, would you prefer reboot_processor=###
> over reboot_cpuid=###?
reboot_cpu=<n>
-hpa
--
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