From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750891AbVKJOBO (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Nov 2005 09:01:14 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750897AbVKJOBN (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Nov 2005 09:01:13 -0500 Received: from ns.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:44237 "EHLO mx1.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750891AbVKJOBM (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Nov 2005 09:01:12 -0500 From: Andi Kleen To: "Jan Beulich" Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/39] NLKD/x86-64 - early/late CPU up/down notification Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 14:10:16 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, discuss@x86-64.org References: <43720DAE.76F0.0078.0@novell.com> <43720EAF.76F0.0078.0@novell.com> <43720F32.76F0.0078.0@novell.com> In-Reply-To: <43720F32.76F0.0078.0@novell.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200511101410.16903.ak@suse.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wednesday 09 November 2005 15:01, Jan Beulich wrote: > x86_64-specific part of the new mechanism to allow debuggers to learn > about starting/dying CPUs as early/late as possible. Please just use the normal notifier chains instead (CPU_UP, CPU_DOWN, register_cpu_notifier). I don't see much sense to have two different mechanisms to do the same thing. While they might be not as early/late as your mechanism I think the users of your debugger can tolerate that. -Andi