From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261923AbVEWRYs (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2005 13:24:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261919AbVEWRYa (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2005 13:24:30 -0400 Received: from colin.muc.de ([193.149.48.1]:13065 "EHLO mail.muc.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261918AbVEWRYZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2005 13:24:25 -0400 Date: 23 May 2005 19:24:24 +0200 Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 19:24:24 +0200 From: Andi Kleen To: Ashok Raj Cc: zwane@arm.linux.org.uk, discuss@x86-64.org, shaohua.li@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch 2/4] CPU hot-plug support for x86_64 Message-ID: <20050523172424.GG39821@muc.de> References: <20050520221622.124069000@csdlinux-2.jf.intel.com> <20050520223417.532048000@csdlinux-2.jf.intel.com> <20050523163816.GA39821@muc.de> <20050523095816.B8193@unix-os.sc.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050523095816.B8193@unix-os.sc.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 09:58:17AM -0700, Ashok Raj wrote: > On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 06:38:16PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > On Fri, May 20, 2005 at 03:16:24PM -0700, Ashok Raj wrote: > > > Experimental CPU hotplug patch for x86_64 > > > ----------------------------------------- > > > - Most of init code that needs to be there for hotplug marked now as __devinit > > > (Didn't use cpuinit, simply because the main framework code in kernel > > > is not the same way, just trying to be consistent) > > > > I dont like that. Can you keep it as __cpuinit please? e.g. > > if cpuhot plug turns out to be a lot of code we could later > > mark it free when we detect at boot the system does not support > > cpu hotplug. With devinit that is pretty much impossible these days. > > > > Also it is better for documentation purposes. > > If its for documentation, then its ok, the reason i thought it will > be dead code/documentation soon is since 90% of the hotplug code is > generic kernel code, which is not under __cpuinit, just some pieces of > x86_64 would alone exist this way, and will not serve real purpose very soon. I would hope these other pieces get converted over. I will probably look into that soon if nobody beats me. -Andi