From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail4.comsite.net (mail4.comsite.net [205.238.176.238]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 312A0B6F1B for ; Thu, 12 May 2011 10:42:18 +1000 (EST) From: Milton Miller Subject: Re: [RFC] powerpc: respect how command line nr_cpus is set To: Kumar Gala , Benjamin Herrenschmidt In-Reply-To: <1304540257-19831-1-git-send-email-galak@kernel.crashing.org> Message-id: Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 19:26:01 -0500 Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, 04 May 2011 around 10:17:37 -0000, Kumar Gala wrote: > We should utilize nr_cpus as the max # of CPUs that we can have present > instead of NR_CPUS. This way we actually respect how nr_cpus is set on > the command line rather than ignoring it. > > Signed-off-by: Kumar Gala > > --- > I think this is what we should be doing, but would like someone else to take > a look. > > - k > > arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c | 10 +++++----- > 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > This looks very similar to my patch at http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/95080/ except I also updated the comment. Also, the variable is nr_cpu_ids while the parameter is nr_cpus=, the first instance in in the changelog is referring to the variable while the second is the parameter. Sorry I took me so long get that part of my series tested and posted. milton