On Thu, 2013-05-23 at 05:18 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 05/22/2013 03:03 AM, Peter De Schrijver wrote: > > On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 06:15:48PM +0200, Stephen Warren wrote: > >> On 05/21/2013 04:13 AM, Joseph Lo wrote: > >>> The Tegra114 could hotplug the CPU0, but the common cpu_disable didn't > >>> support that. Adding a Tegra specific cpu_disable function for it. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Joseph Lo <[email protected]> > >> > >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-tegra/hotplug.c b/arch/arm/mach-tegra/hotplug.c > >> > >>> +int tegra_cpu_disable(unsigned int cpu) > >>> +{ > >>> + switch (tegra_chip_id) { > >>> + case TEGRA114: > >>> + return 0; > >>> + default: > >>> + return cpu == 0 ? -EPERM : 0; > >>> + } > >>> +} > >> > >> Do we expect all/most future chips to support hotplug of CPU0? Or at > >> least, fewer chips to have the restriction than not? If so, it might be > > > > Yes. I think we can safely assume future chips will support hotplugging > > CPU0. > > > >> more forward-looking to write that as: > >> > >> if (tegra_chip_id == TEGRA30) > >> return cpu == 0 ? -EPERM : 0; > >> > > > > Also Tegra20 doesn't support hotplugging CPU0? > > Oh right, this isn't a Tegra30+ file. How about just inverting the > switch so it doesn't need to change later: > > switch (tegra_chip_id) { > case TEGRA20: > case TEGRA30: > return cpu == 0 ? -EPERM : 0; > default: > return 0; > } > OK. Will update a newer version later.
Thanks, Joseph -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
