From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Gleb Natapov Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add kvm_set_boot_cpu_id() API. Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 12:33:13 +0300 Message-ID: <20090628093313.GM20289@redhat.com> References: <1245932460-15616-3-git-send-email-gleb@redhat.com> <4A4737F6.3050607@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org To: Avi Kivity Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:52669 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752340AbZF1JdM (ORCPT ); Sun, 28 Jun 2009 05:33:12 -0400 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n5S9XF2B009478 for ; Sun, 28 Jun 2009 05:33:15 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4A4737F6.3050607@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 12:29:26PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 06/25/2009 03:21 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote: >> Signed-off-by: Gleb Natapov >> > > Why is it needed? (good changelog material). > OK. >> } >> - >> + >> + kvm_set_boot_cpu_id(0); >> > > You're not testing for failure. Doesn't matter here because it's the > default, but then you can omit the call entirely. > This is a place holder. The patch adds an interface but doesn't add any user if this line is omitted. As you said there is no need to check for failure in this case, if we do we will not be able to run on older kernels. -- Gleb.