On Thu, Nov 01, 2007 at 03:12:25PM -0200, Glauber de Oliveira Costa wrote:
> did you test it in a kernel without SMP compiled in ?
>
> I'm a little afraid about what can happen here:
No I didn't, but should have done so - cpu_index exists only
in the SMP case ...
I'll come up with a corrected fix (adding some ifdefs).
> The attribuition of cpu_index only happens in a code that seems to be
> called for all cpus but the boot one.
Yes, just in identify_cpu and not in its "early_" variant.
> So it could even work, but as accident. Unless I'm wrong about it, I'd
> prefer to see an explicit attribution of cpu_index = 0 somewhere for the
> boot cpu.
Hmm, will look at this as well.
> Other than that, good catch! I didn't notice it, because all my present
> cpus were online in my box
You might be able to trigger it by using additional_cpus=<n> in your kernel
command line.
A second test is offlining a CPU: Then cpuinfo was still shown for the
offlined CPU.
Regards,
Andreas
--
Operating | AMD Saxony Limited Liability Company & Co. KG,
System | Wilschdorfer Landstr. 101, 01109 Dresden, Germany
Research | Register Court Dresden: HRA 4896, General Partner authorized
Center | to represent: AMD Saxony LLC (Wilmington, Delaware, US)
(OSRC) | General Manager of AMD Saxony LLC: Dr. Hans-R. Deppe, Thomas McCoy
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
