On 06/02/2012 09:53 PM, Sam Ravnborg wrote:

quoted

As I mentioned in my other mail, I am thinking of changing them to
arch_cpu_pre_starting(), arch_cpu_pre_online() and arch_cpu_post_online().
Let me know what you think of those names.

Much better than "__" - so if none of the guys that excel in core
code objects go for that.

Ok..

quoted

Would you kindly add a changelog and your sign-off to this patch?

Will do in next revision.

Great!

...

Thanks for the throughfull review.
I will address all points - including passing the pointer down,
as I assume you have some future plans with that pointer.

quoted

I still didn't get how this solves the original problem of
not having sparc_cpu_model set to sparc_leon. You mentioned
that by the time we reach leon_smp_cpu_startup, that variable
is not set. Even inside leon_smp_cpu_startup, I don't immediately
see where it is set. Am I missing something?

After looking more closely at the code it is my understanding
that a leon CPU when started will actually jump to the reset
vector and start from there.
So the secondary CPU's will run long time after
sparc_cpu_model is set so we can safely use it.

The sun based cpu will in comparsion jump to
an address supplied to a prom call - so they do not
jump to the reset vector.
But they also have sparc_cpu_model set so no problem there
either.

Ok..

All this are my deductions from reading the code - but this
is not an area I have looked at otherwise..

I may not find time today to cook up a new version of
the patch - but then you will have it tomorrow.

Sure! Once again, thanks a lot for your time and efforts :-)

Regards,
Srivatsa S. Bhat