Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753797AbbBNABs (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Feb 2015 19:01:48 -0500 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:41944 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753132AbbBNABr (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Feb 2015 19:01:47 -0500 Message-ID: <54DE9067.70103@codeaurora.org> Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 16:01:43 -0800 From: Stephen Boyd User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Russell King - ARM Linux , Magnus Damm CC: Simon Horman , linux-kernel , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Mark Rutland , Nicolas Pitre , Dave Martin , SH-Linux Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: smp: Only expose /sys/.../cpuX/online if hotpluggable References: <1423850799-4028-1-git-send-email-sboyd@codeaurora.org> <20150213202002.GB29727@verge.net.au> <54DE5D3A.5070104@codeaurora.org> <54DE65C6.8000304@codeaurora.org> <20150213230137.GH8656@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20150213230137.GH8656@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1527 Lines: 34 On 02/13/15 15:01, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 09:44:50PM +0000, Magnus Damm wrote: >> Also, based on the comment in mcpm_cpu_can_disable() it looks like the >> PSCI hook may be executed once only with your change in place? >> Hopefully PSCI is OK not being invoked for every CPU shutdown. > This is why I've said (in the parent thread) that I'm not happy to > apply this patch. Mark Rutland has indicated that he has MCPM cases > where the CPUs which can be disabled changes dynamically according > to the secure firmware requirements, and ripping out todays > infrastructure in light of that, only to have to add it back again > later makes no sense. Putting it back is not hard. And the infrastructure is not currently used for these purposes so renaming it is appropriate. I can leave it in place if you like, i.e. make a new op for cpu_can_disable and repoint mcpm's mcpm_cpu_disable() at it. Then when mcpm gets migrate support it can actually implement a cpu_disable op. > > However, cleaning things up by removing unnecessary cpu_disable > methods is a good thing to do irrespective of that. > That's fine I can split it out. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project -- 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/