From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [PATCH RT 7/9][RFC] [PATCH 7/9] cpu/rt: Rework cpu down for PREEMPT_RT Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2012 16:51:05 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: References: <20120301185527.064629423@goodmis.org> <20120301190346.172835662@goodmis.org> <1330701323.25686.260.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> <1330702617.25686.265.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-users , Carsten Emde , John Kacur , Peter Zijlstra , Clark Williams To: Steven Rostedt Return-path: Received: from www.linutronix.de ([62.245.132.108]:43623 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750879Ab2CBPvH (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Mar 2012 10:51:07 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1330702617.25686.265.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> Sender: linux-rt-users-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, 2 Mar 2012, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Fri, 2012-03-02 at 16:20 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > Already queued. I'd say #4 is a bug fix as well, though I > > fundamentally hate the ass backwards semantics of that new function. > > It is a bug fix, but I don't like it either. Note, that the patch didn't > update the pin_current_cpu() code, which would have to be done too (to > be a full fix). I know. > But I was also thinking that as a work around, as we plan on changing > this code anyway. Instead of adding a new API which is ass backwards, > just encompass the cpu_hotplug.lock instead. Something like this: Thought about that already. It's way less fugly. Thanks, tglx