Re: [PATCH 1/5] dynamic logical partitioning infrastructure

Brian King wrote:

Nathan Fontenot wrote:

quoted

+#include <linux/kernel.h>
+#include <linux/kref.h>
+#include <linux/notifier.h>
+#include <linux/proc_fs.h>
+#include <linux/spinlock.h>
+
+#include <asm/prom.h>
+#include <asm/machdep.h>
+#include <asm/uaccess.h>
+#include <asm/rtas.h>
+#include <asm/pSeries_reconfig.h>
+
+#define CFG_CONN_WORK_SIZE    4096
+static char workarea[CFG_CONN_WORK_SIZE];
+spinlock_t workarea_lock;

This can be:

static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(workarea_lock);

Then you can get rid of the runtime initializer.

Good catch,  I will fix it in the updated patches.

quoted

+
+int release_drc(u32 drc_index)
+{
+    int dr_status, rc;
+
+    rc = rtas_call(rtas_token("get-sensor-state"), 2, 2, &dr_status,
+               DR_ENTITY_SENSE, drc_index);
+    if (rc || dr_status != DR_ENTITY_PRESENT)
+        return -1;
+
+    rc = rtas_set_indicator(ISOLATION_STATE, drc_index, ISOLATE);
+    if (rc)
+        return -1;
+
+    rc = rtas_set_indicator(ALLOCATION_STATE, drc_index, ALLOC_UNUSABLE);
+    if (rc) {
+        rtas_set_indicator(ISOLATION_STATE, drc_index, UNISOLATE);
+        return -1;
+    }

Is there a better return value here that might be more descriptive than -1?

Yes,  I could return the rtas error code to the user to allow the caller to
evaluate it if they wanted to.  For what I am doing I am only concerned with
success/failure so I did not deal with returning anything other than -1.

I'll update the next patch to return the rtas error for failures and 0
for success.

quoted

+
+    return 0;
+}
+
+static int pseries_dlpar_init(void)
+{
+    spin_lock_init(&workarea_lock);
+
+    if (!machine_is(pseries))
+        return 0;

What's the point of this if check if you return 0 either way?

Yes, it seems a bit odd here, but in patches later in this series I
add additional initialization steps after the machine_is() check
such that it makes sense to bail out here if the check fails.

quoted

+
+    return 0;
+}
+__initcall(pseries_dlpar_init);

quoted

Index: powerpc/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/reconfig.c
===================================================================

--- powerpc.orig/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/reconfig.c    2009-09-11

12:43:39.000000000 -0500

+++ powerpc/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/reconfig.c    2009-09-11

12:51:52.000000000 -0500

@@ -95,7 +95,7 @@
    return parent;

}

-static BLOCKING_NOTIFIER_HEAD(pSeries_reconfig_chain);
+struct blocking_notifier_head pSeries_reconfig_chain =
BLOCKING_NOTIFIER_INIT(pSeries_reconfig_chain);

Can't this just be?

BLOCKING_NOTIFIER_HEAD(pSeries_reconfig_chain);

I think I tried this and was having issues,  I don't remember what they
were though.  I will try to fix this in the updated patch.

-Nathan Fontenot