[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1707022011040.2296@nanos>
Date: Sun, 2 Jul 2017 20:19:54 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Dou Liyang <douly.fnst@...fujitsu.com>
cc: x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, mingo@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com,
ebiederm@...ssion.com, bhe@...hat.com, boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com,
peterz@...radead.org, izumi.taku@...fujitsu.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 07/12] x86/apic: Unify interrupt mode setup for UP
system
On Fri, 30 Jun 2017, Dou Liyang wrote:
> static inline int apic_force_enable(unsigned long addr)
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c
> index 0601054..9bf7e95 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c
> @@ -1198,6 +1198,10 @@ static int __init apic_intr_mode_select(int *upmode)
> }
> #endif
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_UP_LATE_INIT
> + *upmode = true;
> +#endif
This is really wrong. The upmode decision, which is required for calling
apic_bsp_setup() should not happen here, really. As I told you in the
previous patch, use the return code and then you can make further decisions
in apic_intr_mode_init().
And you do it there w/o any ifdeffery:
static void apic_intr_mode_init(void)
{
bool upmode = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_UP_LATE_INIT);
switch (....) {
case XXXX:
upmode = true;
....
}
apic_bsp_setup(upmode);
}
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists