From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@kernel.org>
Cc: x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip] x86: cpu_debug.c prepare report if files are inappropriate or CPU is not supported
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 20:42:22 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090414184222.GC11214@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1239728481.2966.21.camel@ht.satnam>
* Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-04-14 at 18:50 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > > + if (!per_cpu(cpu_modelflag, cpu))
> >
> > hm, on a second look - the whole cpu_model / cpu_modelflag
> > business in arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpu_debug.c looks
> > over-complicated and broken. You encode it into a
> > 'modelflag':
> >
> > per_cpu(cpu_model, cpu) = ((cpui->x86_vendor << 16) |
> > (cpui->x86 << 8) |
> > (cpui->x86_model));
> >
> > just to decode it later on:
> >
> > flag = per_cpu(cpu_model, cpu);
> >
> > switch (flag >> 16) {
> >
> > That does not make much sense. Please use a proper
> > boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor switch() statement, ok?
> >
>
> I am using flags for each cpu, in case there are different CPU in the
> sockets:
>
> struct cpuinfo_x86 *cpui;
> cpui = &cpu_data(cpu);
>
> Do you still think that boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor is better option in
> case for multiple CPUs.
yes. Assymetric SMP never really happened on x86.
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-14 18:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-04-14 16:07 [PATCH -tip] x86: cpu_debug.c prepare report if files are inappropriate or CPU is not supported Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-04-14 16:50 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-14 17:01 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-04-14 18:42 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2009-04-14 18:54 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-04-14 19:02 ` Alan Cox
2009-04-14 19:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-15 5:34 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-04-15 10:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-06-05 17:57 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-06-06 10:21 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-06-07 10:20 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-06-07 12:16 ` [tip:x86/cpu] x86: cpu_debug: Remove model information to reduce encoding-decoding tip-bot for Jaswinder Singh Rajput
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090414184222.GC11214@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=jaswinder@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox