Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933339Ab2EOSeu (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 May 2012 14:34:50 -0400 Received: from mail-pz0-f46.google.com ([209.85.210.46]:57167 "EHLO mail-pz0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933320Ab2EOSer (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 May 2012 14:34:47 -0400 Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 11:34:44 -0700 (PDT) From: David Rientjes X-X-Sender: rientjes@chino.kir.corp.google.com To: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" 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 In-Reply-To: <4FB24C36.7000702@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Message-ID: References: <20120513231325.3566.37740.stgit@srivatsabhat> <20120513231638.3566.30867.stgit@srivatsabhat> <4FB24C36.7000702@linux.vnet.ibm.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1279 Lines: 27 On Tue, 15 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. > Your change, once merged, will not carry patch 0/5 here, so it would be helpful to understand why we need to distinguish between the two as a stand-alone patch in your changelog. -- 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/