Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758775Ab2EOMa0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 May 2012 08:30:26 -0400 Received: from e28smtp04.in.ibm.com ([122.248.162.4]:34003 "EHLO e28smtp04.in.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758685Ab2EOMaY (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 May 2012 08:30:24 -0400 Message-ID: <4FB24C36.7000702@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 17:59:42 +0530 From: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120424 Thunderbird/12.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Rientjes CC: a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, mingo@kernel.org, pjt@google.com, paul@paulmenage.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, rjw@sisk.pl, nacc@us.ibm.com, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com, tj@kernel.org, mschmidt@redhat.com, berrange@redhat.com, nikunj@linux.vnet.ibm.com, vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com, liuj97@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] cpusets: Add provisions for distinguishing CPU Hotplug in suspend/resume path References: <20120513231325.3566.37740.stgit@srivatsabhat> <20120513231638.3566.30867.stgit@srivatsabhat> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit x-cbid: 12051512-5564-0000-0000-000002BAAB48 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1249 Lines: 31 On 05/15/2012 06:03 AM, David Rientjes wrote: > On Mon, 14 May 2012, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: > >> Cpusets needs to distinguish between a regular CPU Hotplug operation and a >> CPU Hotplug operation carried out as part of the suspend/resume sequence. >> So add provisions to facilitate that, so that the two operations can be >> handled differently. >> > > There's no functional change with this patch and it's unclear from this > changelog why we need to distinguish between the two, so perhaps fold this > into patch 5 or explain how this will be helpful in this changelog? > Otherwise it doesn't seem justifiable to add 30 more lines of code. Well, as 0/5 explains, this whole patchset is a suspend/resume-only fix. So we need special-case handling for suspend/resume in cpusets. So the additional code is justified, IMHO. It prepares the ground for patch 5. Again, I split it up here because I didn't want to clutter patch 5; it is complex enough as it is... ;-) Regards, Srivatsa S. Bhat -- 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/