From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alex Williamson Subject: Is patches/linux-2.6.18/xen-hotplug.patch still necessary? Date: Tue, 08 May 2007 16:26:05 -0600 Message-ID: <1178663165.31282.18.camel@lappy> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Is the patch below, that's currently in the Xen tree, still necessary? The original commit comment indicates this is so things like 'top' don't get upset during CPU hotplugs. But should that be handled by the hotplug infrastructure in the kernel (or top itself)? IMHO, this breaks top more than fixes it. Now when I try to look at individual processor statistics, I see quite a few lines of zeros (2 online CPUs, 16 possible CPUs). AFAICT, this also breaks all of the NPROCESSORS queries for sysconf. Can we dump it? Thanks, Alex diff -pruN ../orig-linux-2.6.18/fs/proc/proc_misc.c ./fs/proc/proc_misc.c --- ../orig-linux-2.6.18/fs/proc/proc_misc.c 2006-09-20 04:42:06.000000000 +0100 +++ ./fs/proc/proc_misc.c 2007-01-12 18:18:36.000000000 +0000 @@ -471,7 +471,7 @@ static int show_stat(struct seq_file *p, (unsigned long long)cputime64_to_clock_t(irq), (unsigned long long)cputime64_to_clock_t(softirq), (unsigned long long)cputime64_to_clock_t(steal)); - for_each_online_cpu(i) { + for_each_possible_cpu(i) { /* Copy values here to work around gcc-2.95.3, gcc-2.96 */ user = kstat_cpu(i).cpustat.user; -- Alex Williamson HP Open Source & Linux Org.