On Wed, 17 Apr 2024 15:01:33 +0100
"Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 02:18:55PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > For arm64 the CPU registration cannot complete until the ACPI
> > interpreter us up and running so in those cases the arch specific
> > arch_register_cpu() will return -EPROBE_DEFER at this stage and the
> > registration will be attempted later.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > ---
> > v6: tags
> > ---
> > drivers/base/cpu.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/base/cpu.c b/drivers/base/cpu.c
> > index 56fba44ba391..b9d0d14e5960 100644
> > --- a/drivers/base/cpu.c
> > +++ b/drivers/base/cpu.c
> > @@ -558,7 +558,7 @@ static void __init cpu_dev_register_generic(void)
> >
> > for_each_present_cpu(i) {
> > ret = arch_register_cpu(i);
> > - if (ret)
> > + if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER)
> > pr_warn("register_cpu %d failed (%d)\n", i, ret);
>
> This looks very broken to me.
>
> if (ret && ret != -EPROBE_DEFER)
>
> surely, because we don't want to print a warning if arch_register_cpu()
> was successful?
Gah. Excellent point.
thanks,
Jonathan
>
