From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755607AbZKQSBk (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Nov 2009 13:01:40 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755410AbZKQSBj (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Nov 2009 13:01:39 -0500 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:56867 "EHLO terminus.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755395AbZKQSBj (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Nov 2009 13:01:39 -0500 Message-ID: <4B02E354.9060102@zytor.com> Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 09:54:28 -0800 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.4pre) Gecko/20091014 Fedora/3.0-2.8.b4.fc11 Thunderbird/3.0b4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mike Travis CC: Cyrill Gorcunov , David Miller , mingo@elte.hu, tglx@linutronix.de, akpm@linux-foundation.org, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com, rdreier@cisco.com, rdunlap@xenotime.net, tj@kernel.org, andi@firstfloor.org, gregkh@suse.de, yhlu.kernel@gmail.com, rientjes@google.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com, steiner@sgi.com, fweisbec@gmail.com, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] INIT: Limit the number of per cpu calibration bootup messages References: <20091116215052.GK5653@lenovo> <20091116.190922.182816918.davem@davemloft.net> <20091117155946.GA5476@lenovo> <20091117.082928.10537098.davem@davemloft.net> <20091117174204.GD5476@lenovo> <4B02E242.8040800@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <4B02E242.8040800@sgi.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/17/2009 09:49 AM, Mike Travis wrote: > > I'd like to say that, but Peter wanted it to become an inlined function > return value, and there are too many references in too many arches to > a scalar value, so that moves it out of the scope of this patch set. > Another thing: if we do a lot of testing for "are we running on the boot CPU", an is_boot_cpu() or is_boot_cpu(cpu) function might be a nice piece of syntactic sugar (and more immediately implementable.) -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.