From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: tixy@yxit.co.uk (Tixy)
Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 15:45:21 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] ARM: Add safe diagnostic to indicate when
	__cpu_architecture isn't set up
In-Reply-To: <1313504340-28004-1-git-send-email-dave.martin@linaro.org>
References: <1313504340-28004-1-git-send-email-dave.martin@linaro.org>
Message-ID: <1313505921.2235.6.camel@computer2>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Tue, 2011-08-16 at 15:19 +0100, Dave Martin wrote:
[...]
> This patch is useful for debugging, but I'm not convinced it should
> be merged.
[...] 
>  static inline int __pure cpu_architecture(void)
>  {
> -	BUG_ON(__cpu_architecture == CPU_ARCH_UNKNOWN);
> -	return __cpu_architecture;
> +	if (unlikely(__cpu_architecture == CPU_ARCH_UNKNOWN)) {
> +		extern int __pure __get_cpu_architecture(void);
> +
> +		WARN_ONCE(1, "__cpu_architecture not set yet!\n");
> +		return __get_cpu_architecture();
> +	} else
> +		return __cpu_architecture;
>  }

Seems to me that if we go down this route, cpu_architecture() may as
well remain a non-inline function which just calculates the arch if it's
not already set...

	if (unlikely(__cpu_architecture == CPU_ARCH_UNKNOWN))
		__cpu_architecture = __get_cpu_architecture();
	return __cpu_architecture;

There seems to be too many ways to skin this cat :-)

-- 
Tixy