From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH][ ARM cpu hotplug 1/2 ] extract common code for arm cpu hotplug
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 11:03:31 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101130110331.GA31054@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimZfnmVMDZ2faUPpDHHv3oAhM9ZcVEpM0_MyHbq@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 04:17:32PM +0530, Amit Kucheria wrote:
> Since the main aim here is to consolidate as much code here as
> possible while still allowing platforms to override the defaults,
> would you have an objection to the introduction of a struct smp_ops
> that'll allow a platform to override the defaults? This seems to be
> done on other platforms I've briefly looked at.
I see no point to what is being proposed in this thread. It's _soo_
little code that the platforms have to implement that it really is
not worth the effort.
How do you know whether separating out the cache flushes from the
wait-for-interrupt is an acceptable thing to do? On the Realview
platforms, I suspect it's not acceptable. That means your attempts
to move the cache flusing into a separate function from the wait-for-
interrupt will cause problems - as entering a function creates a
stack frame, and therefore writes to memory which can hit the cache.
Leave it as is. The generic interface for platforms to implement is:
platform_do_lowpower() - does whatever's necessary to idle etc the CPU
platform_cpu_kill() - returns 1 if there's nothing to be done
platform_cpu_disable() - returns 0 if the CPU can be taken offline
Trying to get rid of platform_cpu_kill and platform_cpu_disable, and
then splitting platform_do_lowpower into three new smaller functions
is NOT an improvement.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-30 11:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <AANLkTi=fJeOUhH0xUJF8qx-fTJ5popE7ZuVxDZXpTH-i@mail.gmail.com>
2010-11-29 9:54 ` [PATCH][ ARM cpu hotplug 1/2 ] extract common code for arm cpu hotplug Vincent Guittot
2010-11-29 10:41 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-11-29 17:27 ` Vincent Guittot
2010-11-29 19:24 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-11-30 10:47 ` Amit Kucheria
2010-11-30 11:03 ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message]
2010-11-30 11:51 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-11-30 14:05 ` Will Deacon
2010-11-30 16:24 ` Rob Herring
2010-11-30 16:58 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
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=20101130110331.GA31054@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk \
--to=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).