From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965326AbbJ1Ix3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Oct 2015 04:53:29 -0400 Received: from mx01.mykolab.com ([95.128.36.1]:4078 "EHLO mx-out01.mykolab.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964804AbbJ1Ix1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Oct 2015 04:53:27 -0400 X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.9 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/24] arm64: Consolidate CPU feature handling To: "Suzuki K. Poulose" , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org References: <1444756952-31145-1-git-send-email-suzuki.poulose@arm.com> <562C8D68.9040008@reserved-bit.com> <562FBDD4.5030309@arm.com> Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com, mark.rutland@arm.com, dave.martin@arm.com, Vladimir.Murzin@arm.com, steve.capper@linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org, james.morse@arm.com, marc.zyngier@arm.com, christoffer.dall@linaro.org, andre.przywara@arm.com, edward.nevill@linaro.org, aph@redhat.com, ryan.arnold@linaro.org, adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org From: Siddhesh Poyarekar X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110 Message-ID: <56308CF9.8080206@reserved-bit.com> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 14:23:13 +0530 In-Reply-To: <562FBDD4.5030309@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 27 October 2015 11:39 PM, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote: > I am afraid that would impose a new ABI with complications on how we > handle information about the CPUs in different states (online, offline, > etc). I am open to suggestions here. No I agree it would be non-trivial to maintain this information in a single file. Nor does it solve my problem completely based on the context you give below, so it's not worth spending time on. > See [1] for previous discussion on this topic. > > [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/9/1/391 Thank you for the context. Somehow I was expecting information for all configured processors (as opposed to only online ones) to be available at boot time inside sysfs, but clearly that is not going to happen. Let me see if I can think of a way to use this information in glibc. Thanks, Siddhesh