Re: [PATCH 01/14] [VOYAGER] x86: add {safe,hard}_smp_processor_idto smp_ops

[James Bottomley]

On Tue, 2009-04-14 at 09:35 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> James Bottomley wrote:
> > Not having apics, Voyager can't use the default apic implementation of
> > these, it has to read from a special port in the VIC to get the
> > processor ID, so abstract these functions in smp_ops to allow voyager
> > to live simultaneously with the apic code.
> >   
> 
> I thnk we should just drop safe_smp_processor_id().  It doesn't seem to 
> do anything useful.

OK ... I don't think it does anything either.  It was introduced by
VMware a long time ago if I remember correctly ... something to do with
the way we get the ID in the boot sequence, but I've forgotten the
details.

I can eliminate it as a separate precursor patch to this.

> > diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/smp.c b/arch/x86/xen/smp.c
> > index 429834e..eb795bf 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/xen/smp.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/xen/smp.c
> > @@ -454,6 +454,11 @@ static irqreturn_t xen_call_function_single_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
> >  	return IRQ_HANDLED;
> >  }
> >  
> > +static int xen_hard_smp_processor_id(void)
> > +{
> > +	return read_apic_id();
> > +}
> >   
> 
> This should just be "return smp_processor_id()".  There are no 
> meaningful APICs under Xen.

OK, will reroll.

James


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/