[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YAhuY6PyqnNDyY44@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2021 18:54:43 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: vincent.donnefort@....com
Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
valentin.schneider@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] cpu/hotplug: Add cpuhp_invoke_callback_range()
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 02:11:14PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 05:10:46PM +0000, vincent.donnefort@....com wrote:
> > @@ -157,26 +162,24 @@ static int cpuhp_invoke_callback(unsigned int cpu, enum cpuhp_state state,
> >
> > if (st->fail == state) {
> > st->fail = CPUHP_INVALID;
> > -
> > - if (!(bringup ? step->startup.single : step->teardown.single))
> > - return 0;
> > -
> > return -EAGAIN;
> > }
> >
> > + if (cpuhp_step_empty(bringup, step)) {
> > + WARN_ON_ONCE(1);
> > + return 0;
> > + }
>
> This changes the behaviour of fail.. might be best to refactor without
> changing behaviour.
>
Aah, the trick is in cpuhp_next_state() skipping empty states, so we'll
never get there.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists