On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Yong Zhang <yong.zhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 06:51:07PM +0800, Huacai Chen wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Yong Zhang <yong.zhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 02:50:23PM +0800, Huacai Chen wrote: >> >> diff --git a/arch/mips/kernel/process.c b/arch/mips/kernel/process.c >> >> index e9a5fd7..69b17a9 100644 >> >> --- a/arch/mips/kernel/process.c >> >> +++ b/arch/mips/kernel/process.c >> >> @@ -72,9 +72,7 @@ void __noreturn cpu_idle(void) >> >> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? } >> >> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? } >> >> ?#ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU >> >> - ? ? ? ? ? ? if (!cpu_online(cpu) && !cpu_isset(cpu, cpu_callin_map) && >> >> - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? (system_state == SYSTEM_RUNNING || >> >> - ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?system_state == SYSTEM_BOOTING)) >> >> + ? ? ? ? ? ? if (!cpu_online(cpu) && !cpu_isset(cpu, cpu_callin_map)) >> >> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? play_dead(); >> > >> > I think patch like this should be separated from BSP code. >> > >> > BTW, what's the story behind this change? >> When poweroff, disable_nonboot_cpus() is called, and if HOTPLUG_CPU is >> configured, disable_nonboot_cpus() is not an empty function but try to >> offline nonboot cores. If without this change, poweroff fails. > > Yeah. It's an issue. I think Cavium is also affected (Cc'ing David). > > So mind making this a single patch? We should also send it to -stable IMHO. > > Thanks, > Yong Ok, wait some time, please.
