lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Nov]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH RFC 08/22] drivers: base: Implement weak arch_unregister_cpu()

    > > +
    > > +#ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU
    > > +void __weak arch_unregister_cpu(int num)
    > > +{
    > > + unregister_cpu(&per_cpu(cpu_devices, num));
    > > +}
    > > +#endif /* CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU */
    >
    > I have previously asked the question whether we should provide a
    > stub weak function for the !HOTPLUG_CPU case for this, which would
    > alleviate the concerns around if (IS_ENABLED()) in some of the later
    > hotplug vCPU patches... which failed to get _any_ responses.
    >
    > So, I'm now going to deem the comment I received about if (IS_ENABLED())
    > potentially causing issues to be unimportant, and thus there's no
    > need for a stub weak function. If we start getting compile errors,
    > then we can address the issue at that point. So far, however, the
    > kernel build bot has not identified that this as an issue... and it's
    > been chewing on this entire patch set for well over a month now.
    >

    Make sense to fix this only if it's a real problem.
    Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2023-11-28 15:52    [W:2.875 / U:0.044 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site