From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/27] smpboot: Provide a generic method to boot secondary processors Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2012 03:59:34 +0530 Message-ID: <4FC9424E.9060009@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20120601090952.31979.24799.stgit@srivatsabhat.in.ibm.com> <20120601091008.31979.93586.stgit@srivatsabhat.in.ibm.com> <20120601165113.GA18870@merkur.ravnborg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from e23smtp02.au.ibm.com ([202.81.31.144]:51855 "EHLO e23smtp02.au.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757915Ab2FAWab (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jun 2012 18:30:31 -0400 Received: from /spool/local by e23smtp02.au.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Fri, 1 Jun 2012 22:11:33 +1000 In-Reply-To: <20120601165113.GA18870@merkur.ravnborg.org> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Sam Ravnborg Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, mingo@kernel.org, yong.zhang0@gmail.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com, rjw@sisk.pl, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, nikunj@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Suresh Siddha , Venkatesh Pallipadi On 06/01/2012 10:21 PM, Sam Ravnborg wrote: >> +/* Implement the following functions in your architecture, as appropriate. */ >> + >> +/** >> + * __cpu_pre_starting() >> + * >> + * Implement whatever you need to do before the CPU_STARTING notifiers are >> + * invoked. Note that the CPU_STARTING callbacks run *on* the cpu that is >> + * coming up. So that cpu better be prepared! IOW, implement all the early >> + * boot/init code for the cpu here. And do NOT enable interrupts. >> + */ >> +#ifndef __cpu_pre_starting >> +void __weak __cpu_pre_starting(void *arg) {} >> +#endif > > __What __is __the __purpose __of __all __these __underscaores __used > __as __function __prefix? __It __does __not __help __readability. > We had used "__" as the function prefix to emphasize that these functions are implemented/overriden in the depths of architecture-specific code. But now that you mention it, I see that we don't really have something like an arch-independent variant without the "__" prefix. So adding the "__" prefix might not be really necessary, since there is nothing to distinguish name-wise. However, I do want to emphasize that this isn't generic code. So how about an "arch_" prefix instead? Something like: arch_cpu_pre_starting(), arch_cpu_pre_online() and arch_cpu_post_online()? > Does the nicely worded comment follow kerneldoc style? > I think not as the parameter is not described. > I'll fix that. (The parameter is simply unused for now, btw). Thanks for your review! Regards, Srivatsa S. Bhat