From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" Subject: Re: [UPDATED PATCH 21/27] sparc32, smpboot: Use generic SMP booting infrastructure Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2012 22:04:45 +0530 Message-ID: <4FCA40A5.3060409@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20120601090952.31979.24799.stgit@srivatsabhat.in.ibm.com> <20120601091503.31979.52537.stgit@srivatsabhat.in.ibm.com> <20120601.135612.699120609738854050.davem@davemloft.net> <20120601185448.GA19148@merkur.ravnborg.org> <4FC94693.5050707@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20120602065249.GA19558@merkur.ravnborg.org> <20120602074424.GA19690@merkur.ravnborg.org> <4FC9C871.60902@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20120602151348.GA17409@merkur.ravnborg.org> <4FCA382B.6050601@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20120602162340.GA27530@merkur.ravnborg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from e23smtp01.au.ibm.com ([202.81.31.143]:37907 "EHLO e23smtp01.au.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758995Ab2FBQfn (ORCPT ); Sat, 2 Jun 2012 12:35:43 -0400 Received: from /spool/local by e23smtp01.au.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Sat, 2 Jun 2012 16:26:51 +1000 In-Reply-To: <20120602162340.GA27530@merkur.ravnborg.org> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Sam Ravnborg Cc: David Miller , 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, vapier@gentoo.org, konrad@gaisler.com, tkhai@yandex.ru, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org On 06/02/2012 09:53 PM, Sam Ravnborg wrote: >> >> As I mentioned in my other mail, I am thinking of changing them to >> arch_cpu_pre_starting(), arch_cpu_pre_online() and arch_cpu_post_online(). >> Let me know what you think of those names. > Much better than "__" - so if none of the guys that excel in core > code objects go for that. > Ok.. >> Would you kindly add a changelog and your sign-off to this patch? > Will do in next revision. > Great! > ... > > Thanks for the throughfull review. > I will address all points - including passing the pointer down, > as I assume you have some future plans with that pointer. > >> >> I still didn't get how this solves the original problem of >> not having sparc_cpu_model set to sparc_leon. You mentioned >> that by the time we reach leon_smp_cpu_startup, that variable >> is not set. Even inside leon_smp_cpu_startup, I don't immediately >> see where it is set. Am I missing something? > > After looking more closely at the code it is my understanding > that a leon CPU when started will actually jump to the reset > vector and start from there. > So the secondary CPU's will run long time after > sparc_cpu_model is set so we can safely use it. > > The sun based cpu will in comparsion jump to > an address supplied to a prom call - so they do not > jump to the reset vector. > But they also have sparc_cpu_model set so no problem there > either. > Ok.. > All this are my deductions from reading the code - but this > is not an area I have looked at otherwise.. > > I may not find time today to cook up a new version of > the patch - but then you will have it tomorrow. > Sure! Once again, thanks a lot for your time and efforts :-) Regards, Srivatsa S. Bhat