On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 05:24:34PM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote:On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 09:05:54 -0400,
Jeff Garzik <jeff@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
static int __cpuinit topology_cpu_callback(struct notifier_block *nfb,Wouldn't that also require that _cpu_up checked the return code when
@@ -112,17 +110,18 @@ static int __cpuinit topology_cpu_callba
{
unsigned int cpu = (unsigned long)hcpu;
struct sys_device *sys_dev;
+ int rc = 0;
sys_dev = get_cpu_sysdev(cpu);
switch (action) {
case CPU_ONLINE:
- topology_add_dev(sys_dev);
+ rc = topology_add_dev(sys_dev);
break;
case CPU_DEAD:
topology_remove_dev(sys_dev);
break;
}
- return NOTIFY_OK;
+ return rc ? NOTIFY_BAD : NOTIFY_OK;
}
doing CPU_ONLINE notification (and clean up on error)?
After all code that gets a CPU_ONLINE notification is not supposed to fail.
For allocating resources while bringing up a cpu CPU_UP_PREPARE is supposed
to be used. That one is allowed to fail.