From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/4] acpi_processor: do not mark present at boot but not onlined CPU as onlined Date: Thu, 08 May 2014 13:33:30 +0200 Message-ID: <2022136.gFLGQmut0v@vostro.rjw.lan> References: <1399322991-19329-1-git-send-email-imammedo@redhat.com> <20310348.uigSpUyQCR@vostro.rjw.lan> <20140508060935.GA31184@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Return-path: Received: from v094114.home.net.pl ([79.96.170.134]:51532 "HELO v094114.home.net.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1753106AbaEHLQv (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 May 2014 07:16:51 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20140508060935.GA31184@gmail.com> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Igor Mammedov , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, x86@kernel.org, bp@suse.de, paul.gortmaker@windriver.com, JBeulich@suse.com, prarit@redhat.com, drjones@redhat.com, toshi.kani@hp.com, riel@redhat.com, gong.chen@linux.intel.com, andi@firstfloor.org, lenb@kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Thursday, May 08, 2014 08:09:35 AM Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Monday, May 05, 2014 10:49:49 PM Igor Mammedov wrote: > > > acpi_processor_add() assumes that present at boot CPUs > > > are always onlined, it is not so if a CPU failed to become > > > onlined. As result acpi_processor_add() will mark such CPU > > > device as onlined in sysfs and following attempts to > > > online/offline it using /sys/device/system/cpu/cpuX/online > > > attribute will fail. > > > > > > Do not poke into device internals in acpi_processor_add() > > > and touch "struct device { .offline }" attribute, since > > > for CPUs onlined at boot it's set by: > > > topology_init() -> arch_register_cpu() -> register_cpu() > > > before ACPI device tree is parsed, and for hotplugged > > > CPUs it's set when userspace onlines CPU via sysfs. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Igor Mammedov > > > Acked-by: Toshi Kani > > > > Would there be a problem if I applied this separately from the rest > > of the series? > > If you push the fix upstream for v3.15 then it would be fine and I > could base the other patches on top of your (soon to be upstream) > commit. OK, I can do that. We also seem to need this in -stable, right? -- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.