Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751644AbaBQIer (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Feb 2014 03:34:47 -0500 Received: from nat28.tlf.novell.com ([130.57.49.28]:53242 "EHLO nat28.tlf.novell.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751448AbaBQIel convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Feb 2014 03:34:41 -0500 Message-Id: <5301D7AA020000780011CBE9@nat28.tlf.novell.com> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 12.0.2 Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 08:34:34 +0000 From: "Jan Beulich" To: "Petr Tesarik" Cc: "Borislav Petkov" , , "Thomas Gleixner" , "Ingo Molnar" , , "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Issue a warning if number of present CPUs > maxcpus and CONFIG_HOTPLUG=n References: <20140215150223.63bb52fb@hananiah.suse.cz> In-Reply-To: <20140215150223.63bb52fb@hananiah.suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >>> On 15.02.14 at 15:02, Petr Tesarik wrote: > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c > @@ -1226,9 +1226,6 @@ __init void prefill_possible_map(void) > #ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU > if (setup_max_cpus) > possible += disabled_cpus; > -#else > - if (possible > i) > - possible = i; > #endif > } else > possible = setup_possible_cpus; In between here total_cpus is being set, which now will get a larger value if !HOTPLUG_CPU. Did you check that this has no unintended side effect? And even if you did, it would still feel more safe if you moved that line down after the capping point below. Similarly (but perhaps less important, albeit possibly slightly confusing) the NR_CPUS related warning could now get issued along with the warning below (when possible > nr_cpu_ids > i). Hence that may better be moved down too (or then in effect the if() block you modify below would get moved up). I realize that two warning instead of just one would also be possible without any change, so you're not really introducing some entirely new inconsistency here... Jan > @@ -1246,7 +1243,7 @@ __init void prefill_possible_map(void) > if (!setup_max_cpus) > #endif > if (possible > i) { > - pr_warn("%d Processors exceeds max_cpus limit of %u\n", > + pr_warn("%d Processors exceeds maxcpus limit of %u\n", > possible, setup_max_cpus); > possible = i; > } > -- > 1.8.4.5 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/