From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752234AbbIZJxx (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Sat, 26 Sep 2015 05:53:53 -0400
Received: from cn.fujitsu.com ([59.151.112.132]:39035 "EHLO
	heian.cn.fujitsu.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751988AbbIZJxv (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sat, 26 Sep 2015 05:53:51 -0400
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.15,520,1432569600"; 
   d="scan'208";a="101127665"
Message-ID: <56066AC9.6020703@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 17:52:09 +0800
From: Tang Chen <tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
CC: <jiang.liu@linux.intel.com>, <mika.j.penttila@gmail.com>,
        <mingo@redhat.com>, <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        <hpa@zytor.com>, <yasu.isimatu@gmail.com>,
        <isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com>, <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
        <izumi.taku@jp.fujitsu.com>, <gongzhaogang@inspur.com>,
        <qiaonuohan@cn.fujitsu.com>, <x86@kernel.org>,
        <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-mm@kvack.org>, <tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/7] x86, acpi, cpu-hotplug: Introduce apicid_to_cpuid[]
 array to store persistent cpuid <-> apicid mapping.
References: <1441859269-25831-1-git-send-email-tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com> <1441859269-25831-6-git-send-email-tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com> <20150910195532.GK8114@mtj.duckdns.org>
In-Reply-To: <20150910195532.GK8114@mtj.duckdns.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hi tj,

On 09/11/2015 03:55 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> So, overall, I think this is the right way to go although I have no
> idea whether the acpi part is okay.

Thank you very much for reviewing. :)

>
>> +/*
>> + * Current allocated max logical CPU ID plus 1.
>> + * All allocated CPU ID should be in [0, max_logical_cpuid),
>> + * so the maximum of max_logical_cpuid is nr_cpu_ids.
>> + *
>> + * NOTE: Reserve 0 for BSP.
>> + */
>> +static int max_logical_cpuid = 1;
> Rename it to nr_logical_cpuids and just mention that it's allocated
> contiguously?

OK.

>
>> +static int cpuid_to_apicid[] = {
>> +	[0 ... NR_CPUS - 1] = -1,
>> +};
> And maybe mention how the two variables are synchronized?

User should call allocate_logical_cpuid() to get a new logical cpuid.
This allocator will ensure the synchronization.

Will mention it in the comment.

>
>> +static int allocate_logical_cpuid(int apicid)
>> +{
>> +	int i;
>> +
>> +	/*
>> +	 * cpuid <-> apicid mapping is persistent, so when a cpu is up,
>> +	 * check if the kernel has allocated a cpuid for it.
>> +	 */
>> +	for (i = 0; i < max_logical_cpuid; i++) {
>> +		if (cpuid_to_apicid[i] == apicid)
>> +			return i;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	/* Allocate a new cpuid. */
>> +	if (max_logical_cpuid >= nr_cpu_ids) {
>> +		WARN_ONCE(1, "Only %d processors supported."
>> +			     "Processor %d/0x%x and the rest are ignored.\n",
>> +			     nr_cpu_ids - 1, max_logical_cpuid, apicid);
>> +		return -1;
>> +	}
> So, the original code didn't have this failure mode, why is this
> different for the new code?

It is not different. Since max_logical_cpuid is new, this is ensure it 
won't
go beyond NR_CPUS.

Thanks.

>
> Thanks.
>