* Chen Gong <gong.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > >On Thursday 17 June 2010 05:24:14 Alex Chiang wrote: > >>diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c > >>index 5128435..bcf0cf8 100644 > >>--- a/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c > >>+++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_core.c > >>@@ -223,7 +223,7 @@ static bool processor_physically_present(acpi_handle handle) > >> type = (acpi_type == ACPI_TYPE_DEVICE) ? 1 : 0; > >> cpuid = acpi_get_cpuid(handle, type, acpi_id); > >> > >>- if (cpuid == -1) > >>+ if ((cpuid == -1)&& (num_online_cpus()> 1)) > >> return false; > >> > >> return true; > >> > I have a puzzle why num_online_cpus is used here, instead of > num_possible_cpus. It will be possible under a hotplug scenario. Hm, you're probably right. I was following the example of the other usage of acpi_get_cpuid() in acpi_processor_get_info(), but based on your observation, it's probably better to use num_possible_cpus. I'll change it when I submit a proper patch. Thanks for the review. /ac -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
