Re: [PATCH] x86: fix numaq_tsc_disable calling

[Yinghai Lu]

On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 11:25 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> * Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>       if (cpu_has_bts)
>>               ptrace_bts_init_intel(c);
>> +
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_NUMAQ
>> +     numaq_tsc_disable();
>> +#endif
>
> could you please one more cleanup and hide the CONFIG_X86_NUMAQ in the
> header file, so that we can just call numaq_tsc_disable() without an
> #ifdef?
>
> also, that TSC quirk should probably be turned into an explicit quirk
> function pointer initialized by the early-init NUMAQ code and left NULL
> by everything else - like we it on visws. See include/asm-x86/setup.h:
>
>  /*
>  * Any setup quirks to be performed?
>  */
>  extern int (*arch_time_init_quirk)(void);
>  extern int (*arch_pre_intr_init_quirk)(void);
>  extern int (*arch_intr_init_quirk)(void);
>  extern int (*arch_trap_init_quirk)(void);
>  extern char * (*arch_memory_setup_quirk)(void);
>  extern int (*mach_get_smp_config_quirk)(unsigned int early);
>  extern int (*mach_find_smp_config_quirk)(unsigned int reserve);
>
> the goal is to offload all non-standard setup that is not a reasonable
> deviation of some of the major vendors to such a quirk handler. Quirks
> are a lot easier to maintain and a lot easier to think about - they can
> be just by-line functionality to the main body of default behavior.

looks neat.

can we use one big arch_mach_quicks struct..?

YH
--
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/