From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759907Ab2DKAhX (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Apr 2012 20:37:23 -0400 Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.122]:2050 "EHLO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755898Ab2DKAhW (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Apr 2012 20:37:22 -0400 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=T5EOvo2Q c=1 sm=0 a=ZycB6UtQUfgMyuk2+PxD7w==:17 a=XQbtiDEiEegA:10 a=5SG0PmZfjMsA:10 a=Q9fys5e9bTEA:10 a=FZWJNzLSLkjWNZaiuTYA:9 a=PUjeQqilurYA:10 a=ZycB6UtQUfgMyuk2+PxD7w==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Originating-IP: 74.67.80.29 Message-ID: <1334104638.23924.233.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> Subject: Re: CPU Hotplug rework From: Steven Rostedt To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" , Peter Zijlstra , Arjan van de Ven , "rusty@rustcorp.com.au" , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Srivatsa Vaddagiri , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , Paul Gortmaker , Milton Miller , "mingo@elte.hu" , Tejun Heo , KOSAKI Motohiro , linux-kernel , Linux PM mailing list Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2012 20:37:18 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20120411002836.GM2428@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <4F674649.2000300@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4F67474A.20707@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20120405173918.GC8194@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4F7F4977.4000302@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1334102999.23924.232.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> <20120411002836.GM2428@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2012-04-10 at 17:28 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > Just to throw out the stupid silly approach. > > > > What about creating a "__register_cpu_notifier()" that just does: > > > > int __ref __register_cpu_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb) > > { > > return raw_notifier_chain_register(&cpu_chain, nb); > > } > > > > Also making cpu_maps_update_begin/done() global (and probably rename > > them). I just noticed that the cpu_maps_update_begin/done() are already global. > > > > and then in the above code do: > > > > cpu_maps_update_begin(); > > __register_cpu_notifier(nb); > > do_setup(); > > cpu_maps_update_done(); > > > > > > Just saying, > > That does have some attractive properties, now that you mention it. ;-) Which property? Stupid or Silly ;-) -- Steve