Re: for_each_online_cpu broken ?

[Nigel Cunningham]

Hi.

On Thu, 2005-12-08 at 16:28, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 08, 2005 at 04:22:05PM +1000, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> 
>  > > Yep, I noticed it offers a maximum of 6 cpus on my way.
>  > > As a sidenote, seems kinda funny (and wasteful maybe?), doing this
>  > > on a lot of hardware that isn't hotplug capable. (Whilst I could
>  > > disable cpu hotplug in my local build, this isn't an answer for
>  > > a generic distro kernel).
>  > 
>  > Both suspend to disk (and suspend to ram?) implementations now depend on
>  > hotplug_cpu to enable extra cpus, so there is at least one reason for
>  > them to want hotplug support in a generic kernel.
> 
> You mean suspend -> plug in a new cpu -> resume transitions ?
> That sounds *terrifying*.

Andi is right, it's just a logical unplug. But having said that, I
suppose extra cpus could be plugged/unplugged during a suspend to disk.
Not that I've ever tried it. I have a real SMP mobo, but haven't had the
opportunity to fire it up.

Regards,

Nigel

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/