From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: sboyd@codeaurora.org (Stephen Boyd) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 15:36:40 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] irqchip: gic: Don't complain in gic_get_cpumask() if UP system In-Reply-To: References: <1373067573-29946-1-git-send-email-sboyd@codeaurora.org> <20130712111322.GC3213@e102654-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20130712121023.GB27430@codeaurora.org> <51E71249.4050200@codeaurora.org> Message-ID: <51E71C78.6080604@codeaurora.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 07/17/13 15:34, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > On Wed, 17 Jul 2013, Stephen Boyd wrote: > >> On 07/12/13 05:10, Stephen Boyd wrote: >>> On 07/12, Javi Merino wrote: >>>> I agree, we should drop the check. It's annoying in uniprocessors and >>>> unlikely to be found in the real world unless your gic entry in the dt >>>> is wrong. > And that's a likely outcome in the real world. > >>> Ok. How about this? >> Any comments? > What about this instead: Unfortunately arm64 doesn't have SMP_ON_UP. It sounds like you preferred the first patch using num_possible_cpus() > > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c > index 19ceaa60e0..86d21bc6cb 100644 > --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c > +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c > @@ -368,7 +368,7 @@ static u8 gic_get_cpumask(struct gic_chip_data *gic) > break; > } > > - if (!mask) > + if (is_smp() && !mask) > pr_crit("GIC CPU mask not found - kernel will fail to boot.\n"); > > return mask; > > > Nicolas -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation