Re: [PATCH] x86, apic: Do not increment disabled_cpus from generic_processor_info.

Rakib Mullick
2011-01-10T04:06:27Z

On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 12:38 AM, Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 01/09/2011 07:57 PM, Rakib Mullick wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
>
>  When nr_cpus=n passed from command line and there is N > n physical cpu
> present we *still* have to increment disabled_cpus in generic_processor_info
> because:
>
> 1) We're priting out the number of cpu which is disabled
> 2) total_cpus become inconsistent
>
> and while (1) is not that important, total_cpus _is_ important (it
> is used to print out offlined cpus).
>
When we use nr_cpus=n, it works as an upper limit. If there are any
other CPUs beyond that limit those are not counted and we couldn't put
them back on work. So, when we couldn't use hotpluging feature to back
them into work, should we care about them?

>  So I still fail to see why we need to drop the former increment in
> first place.
> --
>    Cyrill
>