From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1754209Ab0AMCHQ@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1754209Ab0AMCHQ (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 12 Jan 2010 21:07:16 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751896Ab0AMCHO
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Tue, 12 Jan 2010 21:07:14 -0500
Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:57538 "EHLO mga11.intel.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751535Ab0AMCHO (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 12 Jan 2010 21:07:14 -0500
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.49,264,1262592000"; 
   d="scan'208";a="530752263"
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2 5/5] x86: use dmi check to treat disabled cpus as
 hotplug cpus.
From: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
Reply-To: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
To: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
       "ananth@in.ibm.com" <ananth@in.ibm.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
       Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
       Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
       "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <4B4D2811.7000001@kernel.org>
References: <1263338274-6485-1-git-send-email-yinghai@kernel.org>
	 <1263338274-6485-5-git-send-email-yinghai@kernel.org>
	 <1263340563.2854.1011.camel@sbs-t61.sc.intel.com>
	 <4B4D0E39.10200@kernel.org>
	 <1263347315.2854.1296.camel@sbs-t61.sc.intel.com>
	 <4B4D2811.7000001@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain
Organization: Intel Corp
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 18:06:03 -0800
Message-Id: <1263348363.2854.1360.camel@sbs-t61.sc.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.26.3 (2.26.3-1.fc11) 
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

On Tue, 2010-01-12 at 17:55 -0800, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> you mean this blacklist could be too long?

yes.

> 
> switch to whitelist for the box can treat disabled cpus as hotplug
> cpus?

Do we really need all this? Systems which support physical hotplug
typically have lot's of cpu's (mostly will have atleast > 8). Even if we
really need to identify, then perhaps we can check if ACPI has any hints
regarding the physical hotplug support at boot time (we should check
with Andi Kleen or Len Brown on this).

For now, I think we can keep it simple by using the detected enabled
cpu's.

thanks,
suresh