From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261425AbVEXSUE (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2005 14:20:04 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261935AbVEXSUE (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2005 14:20:04 -0400 Received: from colin.muc.de ([193.149.48.1]:9481 "EHLO mail.muc.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261946AbVEXSSx (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2005 14:18:53 -0400 Date: 24 May 2005 20:18:51 +0200 Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 20:18:51 +0200 From: Andi Kleen To: Ashok Raj Cc: akpm@osdl.org, zwane@arm.linux.org.uk, rusty@rustycorp.com.au, vatsa@in.ibm.com, shaohua.li@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, discuss@x86-64.org Subject: Re: [patch 1/4] CPU Hotplug support for X86_64 Message-ID: <20050524181851.GH86233@muc.de> References: <20050524081113.409604000@csdlinux-2.jf.intel.com> <20050524081304.011927000@csdlinux-2.jf.intel.com> <20050524121542.GA86182@muc.de> <20050524085112.A20866@unix-os.sc.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050524085112.A20866@unix-os.sc.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 08:51:13AM -0700, Ashok Raj wrote: > On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 02:15:42PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 01:11:14AM -0700, Ashok Raj wrote: > > > * RED-PEN audit/test this more. I bet there is more state messed up here. > > > */ > > > -static __cpuinit void disable_smp(void) > > > +static __init void disable_smp(void) > > > > Why all these cpuinit->init changes? I think they should stay __cpuinit > > > > The other way round looks ok. > > disable_smp() is called only in smp_prepare_cpus() which is not required > for hotplug. Its currently only required only for startup, and not later. > > I changed the ones from __cpuinit to __init, just in functions marked > with paranoia... i think it can stay cpuinit, unless there is another reason > i didnt catch. Ok. Makes sense. But how about all the other functions that you changed too? Can you double check them. SOme looked suspicious. -Andi