[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2ca0a03c-734c-3a9e-90fd-8209046c5f01@suse.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2020 11:03:13 +0100
From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...e.com>
To: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>
Cc: boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com, jgross@...e.com,
sstabellini@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
bp@...en8.de, hpa@...or.com, jpoimboe@...hat.com,
andrew.cooper3@...rix.com, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, live-patching@...r.kernel.org,
xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, jslaby@...e.cz
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86/xen: Make the secondary CPU idle tasks
reliable
On 19.03.2020 10:56, Miroslav Benes wrote:
> --- a/arch/x86/xen/smp_pv.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/xen/smp_pv.c
> @@ -53,6 +53,7 @@ static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct xen_common_irq, xen_irq_work) = { .irq = -1 };
> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct xen_common_irq, xen_pmu_irq) = { .irq = -1 };
>
> static irqreturn_t xen_irq_work_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id);
> +extern unsigned char asm_cpu_bringup_and_idle[];
Imo this would better reflect the actual type, i.e. be a function
decl. If left as an array one, I guess you may want to add const.
Jan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists