On Thursday, May 08, 2014 08:09:35 AM Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Monday, May 05, 2014 10:49:49 PM Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > > acpi_processor_add() assumes that present at boot CPUs
> > > are always onlined, it is not so if a CPU failed to become
> > > onlined. As result acpi_processor_add() will mark such CPU
> > > device as onlined in sysfs and following attempts to
> > > online/offline it using /sys/device/system/cpu/cpuX/online
> > > attribute will fail.
> > >
> > > Do not poke into device internals in acpi_processor_add()
> > > and touch "struct device { .offline }" attribute, since
> > > for CPUs onlined at boot it's set by:
> > > topology_init() -> arch_register_cpu() -> register_cpu()
> > > before ACPI device tree is parsed, and for hotplugged
> > > CPUs it's set when userspace onlines CPU via sysfs.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Acked-by: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@xxxxxx>
> >
> > Would there be a problem if I applied this separately from the rest
> > of the series?
>
> If you push the fix upstream for v3.15 then it would be fine and I
> could base the other patches on top of your (soon to be upstream)
> commit.
OK, I can do that.
We also seem to need this in -stable, right?
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
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
