From: Dave Hansen <dave@sr71.net>
To: Youquan Song <youquan.song@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hp.com>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>,
youquan.song@intel.com, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: cpu hotplug: possible_cpus broken (again?) next-20130607
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 17:24:16 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51B7BFB0.8080401@sr71.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130612120343.GA22109@linux-youquan.bj.intel.com>
On 06/12/2013 05:03 AM, Youquan Song wrote:
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> + /* return when cpu number greater than maximum number of
> CPUs */
> + if (setup_max_cpus <= num_online_cpus() + 1) {
> + cpu_hotplug_driver_unlock();
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +#endif
> from_nid = cpu_to_node(cpuid);
> ret = cpu_up(cpuid);
Your patch is line-wrapped.
Also, the #ifdef is unnecessary. If CONFIG_SMP is off:
static const unsigned int setup_max_cpus = NR_CPUS;
#define num_online_cpus() 1U
The compiler will take care of optimizing out the the if() without the
explicit #ifdef.
Also, the +1 looks goofy to me. Doesn't this do the same thing (and
isn't it much easier to read)?
if (num_online_cpus() >= setup_max_cpus)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-12 0:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-11 21:51 cpu hotplug: possible_cpus broken (again?) next-20130607 Dave Hansen
2013-06-11 22:05 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-06-11 22:17 ` Dave Hansen
2013-06-11 22:34 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-06-11 22:32 ` Toshi Kani
2013-06-12 12:03 ` Youquan Song
2013-06-12 0:24 ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2013-06-12 12:32 ` Youquan Song
2013-06-12 4:07 ` Yinghai Lu
2013-06-12 11:02 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-06-13 1:36 ` Youquan Song
2013-06-13 15:36 ` Toshi Kani
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=51B7BFB0.8080401@sr71.net \
--to=dave@sr71.net \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=toshi.kani@hp.com \
--cc=youquan.song@intel.com \
--cc=youquan.song@linux.intel.com \
/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