From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757492Ab3GQWeP (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jul 2013 18:34:15 -0400 Received: from mail-qe0-f42.google.com ([209.85.128.42]:41848 "EHLO mail-qe0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757472Ab3GQWeO (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jul 2013 18:34:14 -0400 Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 18:34:11 -0400 (EDT) From: Nicolas Pitre To: Stephen Boyd cc: Javi Merino , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Russell King , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] irqchip: gic: Don't complain in gic_get_cpumask() if UP system In-Reply-To: <51E71249.4050200@codeaurora.org> Message-ID: References: <1373067573-29946-1-git-send-email-sboyd@codeaurora.org> <20130712111322.GC3213@e102654-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20130712121023.GB27430@codeaurora.org> <51E71249.4050200@codeaurora.org> User-Agent: Alpine 2.03 (LFD 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 17 Jul 2013, Stephen Boyd wrote: > On 07/12/13 05:10, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > On 07/12, Javi Merino wrote: > >> I agree, we should drop the check. It's annoying in uniprocessors and > >> unlikely to be found in the real world unless your gic entry in the dt > >> is wrong. And that's a likely outcome in the real world. > >> > > Ok. How about this? > > Any comments? What about this instead: diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c index 19ceaa60e0..86d21bc6cb 100644 --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c @@ -368,7 +368,7 @@ static u8 gic_get_cpumask(struct gic_chip_data *gic) break; } - if (!mask) + if (is_smp() && !mask) pr_crit("GIC CPU mask not found - kernel will fail to boot.\n"); return mask; Nicolas From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: nicolas.pitre@linaro.org (Nicolas Pitre) Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 18:34:11 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [PATCH] irqchip: gic: Don't complain in gic_get_cpumask() if UP system In-Reply-To: <51E71249.4050200@codeaurora.org> References: <1373067573-29946-1-git-send-email-sboyd@codeaurora.org> <20130712111322.GC3213@e102654-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20130712121023.GB27430@codeaurora.org> <51E71249.4050200@codeaurora.org> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, 17 Jul 2013, Stephen Boyd wrote: > On 07/12/13 05:10, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > On 07/12, Javi Merino wrote: > >> I agree, we should drop the check. It's annoying in uniprocessors and > >> unlikely to be found in the real world unless your gic entry in the dt > >> is wrong. And that's a likely outcome in the real world. > >> > > Ok. How about this? > > Any comments? What about this instead: diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c index 19ceaa60e0..86d21bc6cb 100644 --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c @@ -368,7 +368,7 @@ static u8 gic_get_cpumask(struct gic_chip_data *gic) break; } - if (!mask) + if (is_smp() && !mask) pr_crit("GIC CPU mask not found - kernel will fail to boot.\n"); return mask; Nicolas