mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@redhat.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: <PING> Re: [patch x86/core] x86: allow number of additional hotplug CPUs to be set at compile time
Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2008 17:51:52 +0200 (CEST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0810051732380.3398@apollo> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081005152025.GA27066@elte.hu>

On Sun, 5 Oct 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, 5 Oct 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > * Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Yes, it works and I don't see how it could cause any problems.
> > > > 
> > > > Ingo, can we get this in 2.6.27? You can drop my original patch.
> > > > 
> > > > Tested-by: Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@redhat.com>
> > > 
> > > looks good, applied to tip/x86/core, thanks!
> > 
> > No, this patch is horrible. 
> > 
> > The correct check is num_present_cpus(). There is no need to make the 
> > weird additional_cpus hackery globally available.
> 
> ah, indeed!
> 
> applied to tip/x86/core and i've zapped Andi's patch.
> 
> > Btw, additional_cpus has interesting properties. Providing a negative 
> > number < -1 on the kernel command line - happened due to a typo - 
> > explodes in early boot, which is not really surprising, but should be 
> > sanity checked.
> 
> indeed, and that mess was introduced, interestingly, by this commit, 
> three years ago, by Andi:
> 
> | From 420f8f68c9c5148dddf946bebdbc7eacde2172cb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> | From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
> | Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 17:25:54 +0100
> | Subject: [PATCH] [PATCH] x86_64: New heuristics to find out hotpluggable CPUs.
> 
> so to clean up the mess i've removed the additional_cpus= boot parameter 
> and the Kconfig entry as well - see the patch in x86/core below.
> 
> thanks Thomas for decoding this ...
> 
> and no way can any of this go into v2.6.27: this is fragile code with a 
> lot of historic baggage and the original error is non-fatal to begin 
> with. It can easily be backported to .27.1 if testing shows that it has 
> no other adverse side-effects.

Please lets get rid of all this.

Thanks,

	tglx
---------------->
>From 344707c1f43dd0d080828497aacb60c0cc0a8c13 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2008 17:27:56 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] x86, smpboot: remove additional_cpus

remove remainder of additional_cpus logic. We now just listen to the
disabled_cpus value like we did for years. disabled_cpus is always >=
0 so no need for an extra check.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
 arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c |   14 ++------------
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
index 3868018..d6a4d95 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
@@ -1260,8 +1260,6 @@ void __init native_smp_cpus_done(unsigned int max_cpus)
 	check_nmi_watchdog();
 }
 
-static int additional_cpus = -1;
-
 /*
  * cpu_possible_map should be static, it cannot change as cpu's
  * are onlined, or offlined. The reason is per-cpu data-structures
@@ -1281,21 +1279,13 @@ static int additional_cpus = -1;
  */
 __init void prefill_possible_map(void)
 {
-	int i;
-	int possible;
+	int i, possible;
 
 	/* no processor from mptable or madt */
 	if (!num_processors)
 		num_processors = 1;
 
-	if (additional_cpus == -1) {
-		if (disabled_cpus > 0)
-			additional_cpus = disabled_cpus;
-		else
-			additional_cpus = 0;
-	}
-
-	possible = num_processors + additional_cpus;
+	possible = num_processors + disabled_cpus;
 	if (possible > NR_CPUS)
 		possible = NR_CPUS;
 

  reply	other threads:[~2008-10-05 15:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-10-01 23:19 Chuck Ebbert
2008-10-02  8:12 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-02 19:30   ` [patch x86/core] x86: allow number of additional hotplug CPUs to be set at compile time, V2 Chuck Ebbert
2008-10-02 19:42     ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-02 19:48       ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-10-02 19:50         ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-02  9:12 ` [patch x86/core] x86: allow number of additional hotplug CPUs to be set at compile time Andi Kleen
2008-10-02 19:25   ` Chuck Ebbert
2008-10-02 19:44     ` Andi Kleen
2008-10-02 20:09       ` Chuck Ebbert
2008-10-02 20:40         ` Andi Kleen
2008-10-04 16:52           ` <PING> " Andi Kleen
2008-10-04 22:30             ` Chuck Ebbert
2008-10-05 10:28               ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-05 14:52                 ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-10-05 15:20                   ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-05 15:51                     ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2008-10-05 15:56                       ` Ingo Molnar
2008-10-05 20:39                       ` Andi Kleen
2008-10-05 21:49                         ` Thomas Gleixner
2008-10-05 22:45                           ` Andi Kleen
2008-10-05 20:28                     ` Andi Kleen
     [not found] <bijiX-86S-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found] ` <bisvP-3es-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]   ` <biC2k-7cR-17@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]     ` <biCbU-7lA-15@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]       ` <biCOy-8ep-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]         ` <biD7T-5N-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]           ` <bjiEh-2MC-21@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]             ` <bjnXc-1ec-11@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]               ` <bjz2s-78A-13@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]                 ` <bjDfK-40E-19@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]                   ` <bjDIN-4L8-31@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]                     ` <bjEbU-5eX-19@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]                       ` <bjIIi-2Oi-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]                         ` <bjJOk-49Q-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found]                           ` <bjKAv-5bK-17@gated-at.bofh.it>
2008-10-06 10:59                             ` Bodo Eggert
2008-10-06 13:22                               ` Andi Kleen

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=alpine.LFD.2.00.0810051732380.3398@apollo \
    --to=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
    --cc=arjan@infradead.org \
    --cc=cebbert@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    /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

Powered by JetHome