Hi Gerry, Khalid,
On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 02:40 +, Jiang Liu wrote:
> Hi Khalid,
> It depends on it's running on physical or virtualizaiton host. If
> it's a native OS running on physical platforms, we have real platforms
> to support physical processor, memory board, IOH(PCIe host bridge) and
darathil
Hi Vijay,
Great! Thanks for the testing!
-Toshi
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Kani, Toshimitsu
> Sent: Friday, June 29, 2012 7:51 AM
> To: l...@kernel.org; linux-a...@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Kani, Tosh
.
Tested-by: Vijay Mohan Pandarathil
-Original Message-
From: Kani, Toshimitsu
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2012 7:51 AM
To: l...@kernel.org; linux-a...@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Kani, Toshimitsu
Subject: [PATCH] ACPI: Add ACPI CPU hot-remove support
Added CPU hot-remove
On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 16:56 -0600, Khalid Aziz wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-07-06 at 15:00 -0600, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > Yes, offlining and eject are similar operations to a core as it alone
> > cannot be removed physically. Ejecting a core is a logical eject
> > operation, which updates the status (_STA)
On Fri, 2012-07-06 at 15:00 -0600, Toshi Kani wrote:
> Yes, offlining and eject are similar operations to a core as it alone
> cannot be removed physically. Ejecting a core is a logical eject
> operation, which updates the status (_STA) of the object in ACPI after
> offlining. The difference from
On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 11:29 +, IgorMammedov wrote:
> domain.invalid> writes:
>
> >
> > From: Toshi Kani hp.com>
> >
> > Added CPU hot-remove support through an ACPI eject notification.
> > It calls acpi_bus_hot_remove_device(), which shares the same code
> > path with the sysfs eject opera
domain.invalid> writes:
>
> From: Toshi Kani hp.com>
>
> Added CPU hot-remove support through an ACPI eject notification.
> It calls acpi_bus_hot_remove_device(), which shares the same code
> path with the sysfs eject operation. acpi_os_hotplug_execute()
> serializes hot-remove operations be
On Fri, 2012-07-06 at 14:09 -0600, Khalid Aziz wrote:
> On 07/06/2012 01:13 PM, Toshi Kani wrote:
>
> >
> > For step 2) and 4), I am wondering if they are relevant to CPU hotplug
> > these days. In ACPI namespace, a processor object represents a logical
> > processor (or a core when hyper-threadi
On 07/06/2012 01:13 PM, Toshi Kani wrote:
For step 2) and 4), I am wondering if they are relevant to CPU hotplug
these days. In ACPI namespace, a processor object represents a logical
processor (or a core when hyper-threading is disabled). A physical
processor (i.e. a socket) usually has mult
On Sat, 2012-07-07 at 00:27 +0800, Jiang Liu wrote:
> Hi Toshi,
> I think a better solution here is to send a notification to acpid
> daemon instead of directly ejecting the physical processor in kernel by
> apci hotplug work thread. The daemon should do:
> 1) check whether user policy
Hi Toshi,
I think a better solution here is to send a notification to acpid
daemon instead of directly ejecting the physical processor in kernel by
apci hotplug work thread. The daemon should do:
1) check whether user policy allows to remove the physical processor
2) resolve
11 matches
Mail list logo
