From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755455Ab2BLCS4 (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Feb 2012 21:18:56 -0500 Received: from mail-bk0-f46.google.com ([209.85.214.46]:48598 "EHLO mail-bk0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755294Ab2BLCSz convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Feb 2012 21:18:55 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1329006252-1684-1-git-send-email-kjwinchester@gmail.com> References: <20120211140737.GA26637@elte.hu> <1329006252-1684-1-git-send-email-kjwinchester@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2012 22:18:53 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Move per cpu cpu_llc_shared_map to a field in struct cpuinfo_x86 From: Kevin Winchester To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Kevin Winchester , "H. Peter Anvin" , Thomas Gleixner , Borislav Petkov , Randy Dunlap , Nick Bowler , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11 February 2012 20:24, Kevin Winchester wrote: > Commit 141168c36cde ("x86: Simplify code by removing a !SMP #ifdefs from > 'struct cpuinfo_x86'") caused the compilation error: > > mce_amd.c:(.cpuinit.text+0x4723): undefined reference to 'cpu_llc_shared_map' > > by removing an #ifdef CONFIG_SMP around a block containing a reference > to cpu_llc_shared_map.  Rather than replace the #ifdef, move > cpu_llc_shared_map to be a new field llc_shared_map in struct > cpuinfo_x86 and adjust all references to cpu_llc_shared_map. > > Signed-off-by: Kevin Winchester > --- >  arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h      |    1 + >  arch/x86/include/asm/smp.h            |    6 ------ >  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_cacheinfo.c |    4 ++-- >  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce_amd.c  |    7 ++++--- >  arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c             |   15 ++++++--------- >  arch/x86/xen/smp.c                    |    1 - >  6 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) > > >  static void impress_friends(void) > @@ -1053,7 +1051,6 @@ void __init native_smp_prepare_cpus(unsigned int max_cpus) >        for_each_possible_cpu(i) { >                zalloc_cpumask_var(&per_cpu(cpu_sibling_map, i), GFP_KERNEL); >                zalloc_cpumask_var(&per_cpu(cpu_core_map, i), GFP_KERNEL); > -               zalloc_cpumask_var(&per_cpu(cpu_llc_shared_map, i), GFP_KERNEL); >        } >        set_cpu_sibling_map(0); > > diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/smp.c b/arch/x86/xen/smp.c > index 041d4fe..a898ed5 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/xen/smp.c > +++ b/arch/x86/xen/smp.c > @@ -225,7 +225,6 @@ static void __init xen_smp_prepare_cpus(unsigned int max_cpus) >        for_each_possible_cpu(i) { >                zalloc_cpumask_var(&per_cpu(cpu_sibling_map, i), GFP_KERNEL); >                zalloc_cpumask_var(&per_cpu(cpu_core_map, i), GFP_KERNEL); > -               zalloc_cpumask_var(&per_cpu(cpu_llc_shared_map, i), GFP_KERNEL); >        } >        set_cpu_sibling_map(0); > I just realized that I took out a couple of allocations here for cpu_llc_shared_map, without replacing them. Am I leaving cpuinfo_x86.llc_shared_map unallocated then, and just writing to whatever address that field happened to get?