All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Russ Anderson <rja@sgi.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v5 5/5] Make reboot_cpuid a kernel parameter.
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 20:25:39 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130418012539.GN3658@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <516F40C5.40409@zytor.com>

On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 05:39:33PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 04/17/2013 05:17 PM, Robin Holt wrote:
> > 
> > There are 4 items being parsed out of reboot= for x86:
> >  - reboot_mode		w[arm] | c[old]
> >  - reboot_cpu		s[mp]####
> >  - reboot_type		b[ios] | a[cpi] | k[bd] | t[riple] | e[fi] | p[ci]
> >  - reboot_force		f[orce]
> > 
> > This seems like a lot to push into the generic kernel just to make it
> > appear consistent when there will be no real cross arch consistency.
> > 
> > Contrast that with:
> > 1) New kernel parameter (reboot_cpu) which is clear and concise, uses standard
> >    parsing methods.
> > 2) Backwards compatibility in that a user with an existing (broken) reboot=s32
> >    on the command line will set reboot_cpu unless both were specified, in which
> >    case reboot_cpu takes precedence.
> > 
> > What is so fundamentally wrong with that?  It accomplishes exactly what
> > you had asked for in that existing users are not broken.  We are introducing
> > a new functionality in the general kernel.  Why not introduce a new parameter
> > associated with that functionality.
> > 
> 
> You are confusing implementation with interface.  That is what is so
> fundamentally wrong with that.  You really, really don't want to change
> interface unless the world will end if you don't.
> 
> As far as why centralize -- the main concern I have is that someone
> might try to introduce an arch-specific reboot= which is *syntactically*
> different, which is yet again really awful from a user perspective.

Yes and no.  I am saying that the interface is garbage and already
specified as arch specific.  You are asking me to take that garbage
interface and promote it to a general interface which will force us to
implement it in a completely crappy way.

Compare that with introducing a new interface which is concise and then
providing backwards compatibility.  Add to that the fact, I don't need
to pollute the kernel with some poorly done x86 interface and leave that
cruft for others to clean up.

Thanks,
Robin

  reply	other threads:[~2013-04-18  1:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-04-17 18:43 [PATCH -v5 0/5] Shutdown from reboot_cpuid without stopping other cpus Robin Holt
2013-04-17 18:43 ` [PATCH -v5 1/5] CPU hotplug: Provide a generic helper to disable/enable CPU hotplug Robin Holt
2013-04-17 18:43 ` [PATCH -v5 2/5] Migrate shutdown/reboot to boot cpu Robin Holt
2013-04-17 18:43 ` [PATCH -v5 3/5] Move shutdown/reboot related functions to kernel/reboot.c Robin Holt
2013-04-17 18:43 ` [PATCH -v5 4/5] checkpatch.pl the new kernel/reboot.c file Robin Holt
2013-04-17 19:13   ` Robin Holt
2013-04-17 18:43 ` [PATCH -v5 5/5] Make reboot_cpuid a kernel parameter Robin Holt
2013-04-17 19:37   ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-17 19:48     ` Robin Holt
2013-04-17 19:55       ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-17 19:59       ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-17 20:15         ` Robin Holt
2013-04-18  0:17           ` Robin Holt
2013-04-18  0:28             ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-18  0:39             ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-04-18  1:25               ` Robin Holt [this message]
2013-04-18  2:04                 ` Robin Holt

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=20130418012539.GN3658@sgi.com \
    --to=holt@sgi.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=rja@sgi.com \
    --cc=srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /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.