Re: [PATCH 1/2] topology: Check for missing CPU devices

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 02:47 +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Sun, 2012-01-08 at 16:18 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
Ok, both of the patches look sane to me, but it would really be nice
to hear from somebody with the actual affected architectures, and get
a tested-by.

Testing it on hacked-up x86 sounds fine, but doesn't quite have the
same kind of "yes, this fixes the actual problem" feel to it.

Indeed.

Also, can you clarify: does the second patch make the first patch just
an "irrelevant safety net", or are there possible callers of
topology_add_dev() that could cause problems? I'm just wondering
whether maybe the safety net ends up then possibly hiding some future
bug where we (once more) don't register a cpu and then never really
notice?
[...]

driver_init() doesn't check that cpu_dev_init() - or any of the other
functions it calls - is successful.  So in theory at least we could boot
and still have no CPU devices after the first patch.

I mean to say that we could have no CPU devices after the *second*
patch.  So the first patch is an extra defence against that.  (Though we
could just as well panic if register_cpu() fails at boot time.)

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans.
                                                               - John Lennon

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


[Video for Linux]     [Photo]     [Yosemite News]    [Yosemite Photos]    [Video Projectors]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

Add to Google Powered by Linux