RFC: merging of cputables between ppc32/64
will_schmidt at vnet.ibm.com
Fri Sep 9 06:43:04 EST 2005
Kumar Gala wrote:
> I was hoping to get some idea on which direction we wanted to head with
> cputable between ppc32/64. The only major difference that exists
> between the two is the use of cpu_setup().
> On ppc32, cpu_setup is called for each processor in an SMP
> configuration. Which gives us the following signature:
> typedef void (*cpu_setup_t)(unsigned long offset, int cpu_nr, struct
> cpu_spec* spec);
> On ppc64, cpu_setup is only called for the boot cpu. It is left to the
Yeah, at the time, we figured all cpu's in a system would be the same.
with the merge of 32/64, is this still going to be the case?
> cpu save/restore functions to handle setting up the state for
> additional CPUs. Which gives is the following signature:
> typedef void (*cpu_setup_t)(unsigned long offset, struct cpu_spec* spec);
> So my question is do we just extend the ppc64 signature to match the
> ppc32 by having a dummy "int cpu_nr" that is ignored or do we do
> something else? As far as I can tell cpu_nr is only used by ppc32 as
> temp storage so that the cpu_setup functions can return properly.
If cpu_nr is just used as temp storage, then can it be removed and
replaced with a local variable?
> - kumar
> Linuxppc64-dev mailing list
> Linuxppc64-dev at ozlabs.org
More information about the Linuxppc-dev