On 08/10/15 11:46, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
On 08/10/15 11:15, Catalin Marinas wrote:
On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 06:02:00PM +0100, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
index cb3e0d8..6987de4 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
@@ -163,14 +163,14 @@ asmlinkage void secondary_start_kernel(void)
cpu_ops[cpu]->cpu_postboot();
/*
- * Log the CPU info before it is marked online and might get read.
+ * Enable GIC and timers.
*/
- cpuinfo_store_cpu();
+ notify_cpu_starting(cpu);
/*
- * Enable GIC and timers.
+ * Log the CPU info before it is marked online and might get read.
*/
- notify_cpu_starting(cpu);
+ cpuinfo_store_cpu();
smp_store_cpu_info(cpu);
You can move the cpuinfo_store_cpu() call directly to
smp_store_cpu_info().
That looks better, Thanks.
On a second look, smp_store_cpu_info() is also called from
smp_prepare_cpus() by the Boot CPU to update its topology
information, just after init_cpu_topology(). So moving the
cpuinfo_store_cpu() could be called for the boot CPU (which
we don't want, as it takes a different route to storing the
info).
One thing we could do is:
- Move init_cpu_topology() to setup_processor()
- Have the boot CPU update the topology from setup_processor()
there, without going via the smp_store_cpu_info()
- Remove the smp_store_cpu_info() from smp_prepare_cpus().
Should we do that ? Or retain the code as above ?
Suzuki
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
