[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56308CF9.8080206@reserved-bit.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 14:23:13 +0530
From: Siddhesh Poyarekar <sid@...erved-bit.com>
To: "Suzuki K. Poulose" <Suzuki.Poulose@....com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc: catalin.marinas@....com, will.deacon@....com, mark.rutland@....com,
dave.martin@....com, Vladimir.Murzin@....com,
steve.capper@...aro.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org, james.morse@....com,
marc.zyngier@....com, christoffer.dall@...aro.org,
andre.przywara@....com, edward.nevill@...aro.org, aph@...hat.com,
ryan.arnold@...aro.org, adhemerval.zanella@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/24] arm64: Consolidate CPU feature handling
On Tuesday 27 October 2015 11:39 PM, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
> I am afraid that would impose a new ABI with complications on how we
> handle information about the CPUs in different states (online, offline,
> etc). I am open to suggestions here.
No I agree it would be non-trivial to maintain this information in a
single file. Nor does it solve my problem completely based on the
context you give below, so it's not worth spending time on.
> See [1] for previous discussion on this topic.
>
> [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/9/1/391
Thank you for the context. Somehow I was expecting information for all
configured processors (as opposed to only online ones) to be available
at boot time inside sysfs, but clearly that is not going to happen. Let
me see if I can think of a way to use this information in glibc.
Thanks,
Siddhesh
--
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