lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Jan]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] topology: Check for missing CPU devices
From
Date
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.

Ben.

--
Ben Hutchings
Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans.
- John Lennon
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-01-09 03:51    [W:0.509 / U:0.428 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site