x86, xsave: some code cleanups and reworks
in [Kernel]
|
Prev: x86, numa: fix boot without RAM on node0 again
Next: [PATCH] vga16fb: refuse to load in face of other driver controlling primary card
From: Cyrill Gorcunov on 21 Jul 2010 13:10 On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 08:52:11PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: > On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 09:32:35AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > On 07/20/2010 01:17 PM, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: > > > > > > well, not true, this id is being set in setup_per_cpu_areas() > > > note the snippet > > > > > > if (cpu == boot_cpu_id) > > > switch_to_new_gdt(cpu); > > > > > > but cycle of assignment is done over all possible cpus so > > > smp_processor_id will be = 0 for BP but definitely it's > > > confusing and better to check for BP via explicit cpu == boot_cpu_id > > > I think. Though I might be missing something. > > > > > > > I think the style (!smp_processor_id()) is already in use in other > > places, but we should be consistent in style; if you want to introduce a > > new style I certainly agree that (is_boot_cpu()) is pretty clear but it > > should be introduced universally. > > > > -hpa > > > Peter, also I think such tuning must be done at merge window time only, just to not break other's patch queues. -- Cyrill -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: H. Peter Anvin on 21 Jul 2010 13:20 On 07/21/2010 10:01 AM, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: > > Peter, also I think such tuning must be done at merge window time only, > just to not break other's patch queues. > Realistically it should be done right after the merge window for the *next* merge window. -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Cyrill Gorcunov on 21 Jul 2010 13:20 On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:11:56AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 07/21/2010 10:01 AM, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: > > > > Peter, also I think such tuning must be done at merge window time only, > > just to not break other's patch queues. > > > > Realistically it should be done right after the merge window for the > *next* merge window. > > -hpa > ok, which means Robert should use old conventional test at the moment instead of introducing is_boot_cpu I suppose. -- Cyrill -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Robert Richter on 21 Jul 2010 13:30 On 21.07.10 13:17:18, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: > On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:11:56AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > On 07/21/2010 10:01 AM, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: > > > > > > Peter, also I think such tuning must be done at merge window time only, > > > just to not break other's patch queues. > > > > > > > Realistically it should be done right after the merge window for the > > *next* merge window. > > > > -hpa > > > > ok, which means Robert should use old conventional test at the moment > instead of introducing is_boot_cpu I suppose. Yes, I am just using: if (!smp_processor_id()) ... Cyrill, if you like, I will leave it up to you to introduce the is_boot_cpu() macro. I still have patch 7/7 in my new posting in that removes the boot_cpu_id. If your patch comes soon this will be obsolete as all places will have the macro then. Thanks, -Robert -- Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. Operating System Research Center -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Cyrill Gorcunov on 21 Jul 2010 13:40
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 07:24:28PM +0200, Robert Richter wrote: > On 21.07.10 13:17:18, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:11:56AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > > On 07/21/2010 10:01 AM, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: > > > > > > > > Peter, also I think such tuning must be done at merge window time only, > > > > just to not break other's patch queues. > > > > > > > > > > Realistically it should be done right after the merge window for the > > > *next* merge window. > > > > > > -hpa > > > > > > > ok, which means Robert should use old conventional test at the moment > > instead of introducing is_boot_cpu I suppose. > > Yes, I am just using: > > if (!smp_processor_id()) > ... ok, I see > > Cyrill, if you like, I will leave it up to you to introduce the > is_boot_cpu() macro. ok Robert, I may handle it, notes below > > I still have patch 7/7 in my new posting in that removes the > boot_cpu_id. If your patch comes soon this will be obsolete as all > places will have the macro then. > I guess I can make it in a hour or so (since need to check all possible places) but it might break other's queue I fear. That is why hpa noted such things should go after merge window. So I don't know Robert what would be preferred. If Peter pick up your patch for now -- I may just keep it somewhere localy to not loose the traces of boot_cpu_id and use this patch as helper. I just fear I can forget about this promise to introduce is_boot_cpu helper later ;) Another option could be -- introduce it now and send to trivial@ ML so it'll be picked up there and pushed upstream after merge window. > Thanks, > > -Robert > > -- > Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. > Operating System Research Center > -- Cyrill -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ |