From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>
To: Rakib Mullick <rakib.mullick@gmail.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86,apic: Checking kernel option before detect_init_APIC()
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 00:00:11 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090409200011.GD7558@lenovo> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b9df5fa10904082208x69dc3b2ex46b8edac7d8cee81@mail.gmail.com>
[Rakib Mullick - Thu, Apr 09, 2009 at 11:08:43AM +0600]
| On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 8:50 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
| >
| > * Rakib Mullick <rakib.mullick@gmail.com> wrote:
| >
| > Hm, are you sure this is a cleanup only? (i.e. no side-effects)
| My quick review over code, i don't think there's any.Unless I'm not
| missing anything. Kernel option has been passed when before kernel
| starts, so I think it's safe.
Hi Rakib,
yes, disable_apic early parameter handled earlier then
init_apic_mappings is being called but we could reach
disable_apic=1 with not only as kernel option but as
result of acpi_mps_check for example (which
is called earlier then init_apic_mappings though).
So this snippet is safe I believe.
| >
| > Also, even if it's a pure cleanup, wouldnt it be even cleaner to
| > propagate this check into detect_init_APIC() - and thus get rid of
| > the open-coded disable_apic check altogether?
In point! We do same fasion check in APIC_init_uniprocessor
| Yes, could be. How we'll understand that whether apic has been
| disabled from kernel option or not (if we requires later on)?
AFAIS, as only we set disable_apic=1 from kernel option (or other
ways) we clear X86_FEATURE_APIC likewise. So I don't see easy way
to distinguish the reason why apic is disabled. But to be precise
APIC_init_uniprocessor print us some info.
So I'm for Ingo's idea!
|
| Rakib
| >
| > Ingo
| >
|
Cyrill
prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-09 20:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-28 1:25 [PATCH] x86,apic: Checking kernel option before detect_init_APIC() Rakib Mullick
2009-04-08 14:50 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-09 5:08 ` Rakib Mullick
2009-04-09 20:00 ` Cyrill Gorcunov [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090409200011.GD7558@lenovo \
--to=gorcunov@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rakib.mullick@gmail.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.