Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 15:25:00 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>, Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>,
       ego@in.ibm.com, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       arjan@intel.linux.com, vatsa@in.ibm.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com,
       ashok.raj@intel.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] Redesign cpu_hotplug locking.
Message-Id: <20060826152500.34f56d01.akpm@osdl.org>
In-Reply-To: <20060826220525.GA27933@elte.hu>
References: <20060824102618.GA2395@in.ibm.com>
	<20060824091704.cae2933c.akpm@osdl.org>
	<20060825095008.GC22293@redhat.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.64.0608261404350.11811@g5.osdl.org>
	<20060826220525.GA27933@elte.hu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1075
Lines: 26

On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 00:05:25 +0200
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:

> 
> * Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> wrote:
> 
> > I personally doubt that it's the case that we'd want to accelerate 
> > inclusion - very few things actually do CPU hotplug, and right now the 
> > only way to even hit the sequences in normal use is literally just the 
> > "suspend under SMP" case that hasn't historically worked very well 
> > anyway, but was what made at least me personally aware of the problems 
> > ;^).
> 
> there's also bootup on SMP that is technically a series of hot-cpu-add 
> events. That already tests some aspects of it. Maybe we should turn 
> shutdown into the logical reverse: into a series of hot-cpu-remove 
> events?
> 

Would be logical, but we would want to avoid making CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU a
requirement for SMP. 
-
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/