linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC v2] cpu-hotplug: provide prototypes for arch CPU registration

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <871qez1cfd.ffs@tglx>
Date:   Fri, 15 Sep 2023 21:09:10 +0200
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     "Russell King (Oracle)" <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>,
        linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, James Morse <james.morse@....com>
Cc:     loongarch@...ts.linux.dev, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
        jianyong.wu@....com, justin.he@....com,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@...wei.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2] cpu-hotplug: provide prototypes for arch CPU
 registration

On Thu, Sep 14 2023 at 15:51, Russell King wrote:
> Provide common prototypes for arch_register_cpu() and
> arch_unregister_cpu(). These are called by acpi_processor.c, with
> weak versions, so the prototype for this is already set. It is
> generally not necessary for function prototypes to be conditional
> on preprocessor macros.
>
> Some architectures (e.g. Loongarch) are missing the prototype for this,
> and rather than add it to Loongarch's asm/cpu.h, lets do the job once
> for everyone.
>
> Since this covers everyone, remove the now unnecessary prototypes in
> asm/cpu.h, and we also need to remove the 'static' from one of ia64's
> arch_register_cpu() definitions.
>
> Signed-off-by: Russell King (Oracle) <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>
> ---
> Spotted during the review of James Morse's patches, I think rather than
> adding prototypes for loongarch to its asm/cpu.h, it would make more
> sense to provide the prototypes in a non-arch specific header file so
> everyone can benefit, rather than having each architecture do its own
> thing.
>
> I'm sending this as RFC as James has yet to comment on my proposal, and
> also to a wider audience, and although it makes a little more work for
> James (to respin his series) it does mean that his series should get a
> little smaller.

And it makes tons of sense.

> See:
>  https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230913163823.7880-2-james.morse@arm.com
>  https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230913163823.7880-4-james.morse@arm.com
>  https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230913163823.7880-23-james.morse@arm.com
>
> v2: lets try not fat-fingering vim.

Yeah. I wondered how you managed to mangle that :)

>  arch/ia64/include/asm/cpu.h | 5 -----
>  arch/ia64/kernel/topology.c | 2 +-

That's moot as ia64 is queued for removal :)

Thanks,

        tglx