From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ralf@gnu.org, rhw@memalpha.cx,
mingo@redhat.com, paulus@samba.org, anton@samba.org,
schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, bh@sgi.com, davem@redhat.com, ak@suse.de,
torvalds@transmeta.com
Subject: Re: Hotplug CPU Boot Changes: BEWARE
Date: 07 Jun 2002 08:51:32 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m1elfjw39n.fsf@frodo.biederman.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E17GHB3-0000gD-00@wagner.rustcorp.com.au>
Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> writes:
> Hi all (esp port maintainers),
>
> In writing the hotplug CPU stuff, Linus asked me to alter the
> boot sequence to "plug in" CPUs. I am shortly going to be sending
> these patches to him now I have got my x86 box to boot with the
> changes.
If to the general SMP case is added the ability to dynamically enable
and disable cpus at runtime, this infrastructure work appears to have
general applicability now. Allowing for example dynamic
enable/disable of HT on P4-Xeons at runtime for example.
> There are two ways to transition: one is to do the minimal hacks so
> that the new boot code works (as per my x86 patch). The other is to
> take into account that the next stage (optional by arch) is to
> actually bring cpus up and down on the fly, and hence actually write
> code that will work after boot as well (as per my ppc patch).
Thinking in terms of physically hot-plugging cpus has me doubt the
actual utility of this code. Instead thinking of dynamically enabling
and disabling processors for debugging sounds very reasonable.
But for the latter something just a little more than minimal hacks
must be implemented. But dynamic cpu enable/disable is definitely
worth it.
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-06-07 15:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-06-07 10:40 Hotplug CPU Boot Changes: BEWARE Rusty Russell
2002-06-07 14:51 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2002-06-02 16:22 ` Pavel Machek
2002-06-08 1:55 ` Keith Owens
2002-06-10 7:05 ` Rusty Russell
2002-06-10 13:43 ` Eric W. Biederman
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=m1elfjw39n.fsf@frodo.biederman.org \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=anton@samba.org \
--cc=bh@sgi.com \
--cc=davem@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=ralf@gnu.org \
--cc=rhw@memalpha.cx \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.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