From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754344AbcKIRBO (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Nov 2016 12:01:14 -0500 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([78.46.96.112]:56756 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753416AbcKIRBN (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Nov 2016 12:01:13 -0500 Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 18:01:09 +0100 From: Borislav Petkov To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Cc: "Luck, Tony" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rt@linutronix.de, linux-edac@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [PATCH 22/25] x86/mcheck: Do the init in one place Message-ID: <20161109170109.kpksvz2q6ltwtkud@pd.tnic> References: <20161103145021.28528-1-bigeasy@linutronix.de> <20161103145021.28528-23-bigeasy@linutronix.de> <20161107184532.xj6wzdjlzwhshcmf@pd.tnic> <20161107185524.GA2536@intel.com> <20161107201224.7xazmhgm7bogkrw5@pd.tnic> <20161108092302.wraci5m2cxqozlew@pd.tnic> <20161109142221.3r6xwhkxbckuv3bh@linutronix.de> <20161109153807.7mv7b5f4oqfijq2h@pd.tnic> <20161109162451.bkch53nj32rtqszy@linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20161109162451.bkch53nj32rtqszy@linutronix.de> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20161014 (1.7.1) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 05:24:51PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > The behaviour was not changed - it was only reorganized to keep in one > spot. So there's the full CPU init path down cpu_up() -> ... -> identify_cpu() where mcheck_cpu_init() is called and then there's also the hotplug callbacks in mce_cpu_callback(). What you're proposing now is, merge the two. But then the full path down identify_cpu() could still do mheck_cpu_init() regardless where you move it. IOW, I still don't see why this change is needed. In more OW, why can't you simply do: err = cpuhp_setup_state(CPUHP_AP_X86_MCE_STARTING, "x86/mce:starting", mce_reenable_cpu, NULL); and use the current notifier callback? I still don't get the need for this churn. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.