[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 3/6] xen/arm: gic: Use the correct CPU ID
On Fri, 2013-09-20 at 16:58 +0100, Julien Grall wrote: > On 09/20/2013 04:44 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: > > On Fri, 2013-09-20 at 16:03 +0100, Julien Grall wrote: > > > >> +static unsigned int gic_cpu_mask(const cpumask_t *cpumask) > >> +{ > >> + unsigned int cpu; > >> + unsigned int mask = 0; > >> + cpumask_t possible_mask; > >> + > >> + cpumask_and(&possible_mask, cpumask, &cpu_possible_map); > > > > Based on the other subconversation doesn't this need to be online_mask? > > Or is the cpu area setup for cpus which are possible but not online? > > cpu area is initialized a little bit before the cpu is bring up: > * initialize per cpu data (via the notifier_call_chain CPU_UP_PREPARE) > * signal the cpu to boot (__cpu_up) > ... > * call start_secondary > * initialize the gic cpu interface (gic_cpu_init) > * route ppis (which used gic_cpu_mask) > * set the cpu online > > If we use the cpu online mask, Xen won't be able to route the different > ppis to the processor. > > > Should the check (whichever it is) be an assertion? > > If we stay with the cpu_possible_map, I think we are fine without an > assertion. OK. OOI where in the above is the cpu_possible_map setup? Quite a bit before the CPU_UP_PREPARE hook I think? It shouldn't be a problem, just interested... Ian _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |