All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Hiroshi Shimamoto <h-shimamoto@ct.jp.nec.com>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Cc: kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	hbabu@us.ibm.com, vgoyal@in.ibm.com,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
	tglx@linutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert x86: add lapic_shutdown for x86_64
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 17:05:17 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4726753D.3010601@ct.jp.nec.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071029161534.6e7f0db6@laptopd505.fenrus.org>

Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 15:39:46 -0700
> Hiroshi Shimamoto <h-shimamoto@ct.jp.nec.com> wrote:
> 
>> lapic_shutdown is useless on x86_64.
>>
> 
> .... but since the goal is to get apic_32.c and apic_64.c to be more
> converging (to the point of becoming the same file)... isn't your patch
> going in the opposite direction?
> 
Hmm, I'm not sure that this revert affects x86 unification.
Vivek said that probably we don't have to introduce lapic_shutdown() for 64bit.
So I submitted this patch which reverts my previous post, it was applied before
the comment.

Thanks
Hiroshi Shimamoto

_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Hiroshi Shimamoto <h-shimamoto@ct.jp.nec.com>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Cc: vgoyal@in.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, hbabu@us.ibm.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert x86: add lapic_shutdown for x86_64
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 17:05:17 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4726753D.3010601@ct.jp.nec.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071029161534.6e7f0db6@laptopd505.fenrus.org>

Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 15:39:46 -0700
> Hiroshi Shimamoto <h-shimamoto@ct.jp.nec.com> wrote:
> 
>> lapic_shutdown is useless on x86_64.
>>
> 
> .... but since the goal is to get apic_32.c and apic_64.c to be more
> converging (to the point of becoming the same file)... isn't your patch
> going in the opposite direction?
> 
Hmm, I'm not sure that this revert affects x86 unification.
Vivek said that probably we don't have to introduce lapic_shutdown() for 64bit.
So I submitted this patch which reverts my previous post, it was applied before
the comment.

Thanks
Hiroshi Shimamoto

  reply	other threads:[~2007-10-30  0:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-10-20  1:18 [PATCH 0/3] x86: unify crash_32/64.c Hiroshi Shimamoto
2007-10-20  1:18 ` Hiroshi Shimamoto
2007-10-20  1:21 ` [PATCH 1/3] x86: add lapic_shutdown for x86_64 Hiroshi Shimamoto
2007-10-20  1:21   ` Hiroshi Shimamoto
2007-10-24  6:29   ` Vivek Goyal
2007-10-24  6:29     ` Vivek Goyal
2007-10-24 21:27     ` Hiroshi Shimamoto
2007-10-24 21:27       ` Hiroshi Shimamoto
2007-10-25  0:28       ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-10-25  0:28         ` Eric W. Biederman
2007-10-29 22:45         ` Hiroshi Shimamoto
2007-10-29 22:45           ` Hiroshi Shimamoto
2007-10-29 22:39     ` [PATCH] Revert " Hiroshi Shimamoto
2007-10-29 22:39       ` Hiroshi Shimamoto
2007-10-29 23:15       ` Arjan van de Ven
2007-10-29 23:15         ` Arjan van de Ven
2007-10-30  0:05         ` Hiroshi Shimamoto [this message]
2007-10-30  0:05           ` Hiroshi Shimamoto
2007-10-30  1:06           ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-10-30  1:06             ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-10-20  1:23 ` [PATCH 2/3] x86: add safe_smp_processor_id " Hiroshi Shimamoto
2007-10-20  1:23   ` Hiroshi Shimamoto
2007-10-24  6:31   ` Vivek Goyal
2007-10-24  6:31     ` Vivek Goyal
2007-10-24  9:01     ` Vivek Goyal
2007-10-24  9:01       ` Vivek Goyal
2007-10-20  1:24 ` [PATCH 3/3] x86: unify crash_32/64.c Hiroshi Shimamoto
2007-10-20  1:24   ` Hiroshi Shimamoto
2007-10-20 10:50 ` [PATCH 0/3] " Thomas Gleixner
2007-10-20 10:50   ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-10-24  6:34 ` Vivek Goyal
2007-10-24  6:34   ` Vivek Goyal
2007-10-24 16:28   ` Hiroshi Shimamoto
2007-10-24 16:28     ` Hiroshi Shimamoto
2007-10-25 17:58     ` Hiroshi Shimamoto
2007-10-25 17:58       ` Hiroshi Shimamoto
2007-10-26 21:43       ` Hiroshi Shimamoto
2007-10-26 21:43         ` Hiroshi Shimamoto
2007-10-26 22:37         ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-10-26 22:37           ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-10-27  0:13           ` Hiroshi Shimamoto
2007-10-27  0:13             ` Hiroshi Shimamoto
2007-10-27  1:15             ` Hiroshi Shimamoto
2007-10-27  1:15               ` Hiroshi Shimamoto

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=4726753D.3010601@ct.jp.nec.com \
    --to=h-shimamoto@ct.jp.nec.com \
    --cc=arjan@infradead.org \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=hbabu@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=vgoyal@in.ibm.com \
    /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.