Re: [Patch -v3 4/4] Make reboot_cpuid a kernel parameter.

[Robin Holt]

On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 11:01:09AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Robin Holt <holt@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 10:47:49AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > > We usually don't break working user setups as a matter if policy.  Only if it can't be avoided.
> > > 
> > > Robin Holt <holt@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > 
> > > >On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 10:18:31AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > > >> Um... doesn't this break anyone who currently depends on this?
> > > >
> > > >Yes.  That is also why I kept this separate and not tagged for
> > > >stable. They would need to start using the more general kernel
> > > >parameter
> > > >to get the same functionality.  Should I have done it differently?
> > 
> > How about:
> > Author: Robin Holt <holt@xxxxxxx>
> > Date:   Mon Apr 15 11:39:33 2013 -0500
> > 
> >     Make reboot_cpuid a kernel parameter.
> >     
> >     Moving the reboot=s<##> parameter for x86 to a kernel parameter
> >     proper.  I did not find any other arch that was specifying the
> >     reboot cpu.
> >     
> >     I left a compatibility mode in there.  The new parameter always
> >     takes precedence.  I also fixed up the current code to support
> >     up to cpuid's up to the current max of 4096.
> 
> Looks pretty nice and clean to me, as the old boot parameter still keeps working.
> 
> Mind sending an updated series that includes all the fixes and the Tested-by from 
> Shawn Guo?

Will do.  I am still going through the comments from Joe Perches to the
third patch.  Already have added the Tested-by to just the first patch.
Otherwise, I am ready to send -v4.

Robin
--
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/