| To: | Hillf Danton <dhillf@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] mark Netlogic XLR chip as SMT capable |
| From: | Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org> |
| Date: | Mon, 3 Oct 2011 11:32:04 +0100 |
| Cc: | "Jayachandran C." <jayachandranc@netlogicmicro.com>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org |
| In-reply-to: | <CAJd=RBBt0xNgUrz9XnU0TcHo443t3j323zYg8jMPYRjXsV=EHw@mail.gmail.com> |
| References: | <CAJd=RBAc8Zv1JZfrAx2Ajj7fdJv=oA+eYHVBLfcFNOoZNyG7fg@mail.gmail.com> <20111002083044.GA23668@jayachandranc.netlogicmicro.com> <CAJd=RBBt0xNgUrz9XnU0TcHo443t3j323zYg8jMPYRjXsV=EHw@mail.gmail.com> |
| Sender: | linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 01:46:46PM +0800, Hillf Danton wrote: > + unsigned int cpu, core_id; > + > + cpu = smp_processor_id(); > + core_id = (cpu >> 2) & 0x7; > + cpu_data[cpu].core = core_id; This is going to break in setups where Linux is not being booted on what the hardware considers CPU core 0. Which is not uncommon in embedded setups. You may want to probe the hardware for the core ID rather than relying on smp_processor_id() here. Ralf |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [RFC] mark Netlogic XLR chip as SMT capable, Hillf Danton |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [RFC] mark Netlogic XLR chip as SMT capable, Jayachandran C . |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [RFC] mark Netlogic XLR chip as SMT capable, Hillf Danton |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [RFC] mark Netlogic XLR chip as SMT capable, Jayachandran C . |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |