![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 15:24:25 +1100 Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> wrote: > KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > > On Thu, 16 Mar 2006 14:43:38 +1100 > > Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> wrote: > > > > > >>The only places where things might care is arch bootup code, but > >>the cpu interface is such that the arch code is expected to _hide_ > >>any weird details from these generic interfaces. > >> > > > > Please see i386 patch. it contains BUG fix. > > cpu_msrs[i].coutners are allocated by for_each_online_cpu(). > > and free it by for_each_possible_cpus() without no pointer check. > > > > Well that's another problem then, such a fix should not be sent in > this patchset, but as a separate patch. > Sorry. and It wasn't real problem as Yoshifuji said. I'll send fix patch later. > > I think this kind of confusion will be seen again in future. > > I'm sure that renaming for_each_cpu would not prevent that either. > But maintainers can check easily whether online or possible should be, when they received a patch which includes for_each_cpu(). -- Kame - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-03-16 06:24 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||