On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 12:29 PM Qais Yousef <qais.you...@arm.com> wrote: > > On 04/26/20 17:24, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > I would do this the other way around: > > > > 1. Make x86 call freeze_secondary_cpus() directly, rename > > enable_nonboot_cpus() and drop disable_nonboot_cpus(). > > All of this in a single patch?
Well, why not? Calling freeze_secondary_cpus() directly causes disable_nonboot_cpus() to be unused (and so it can be dropped in the same patch) and it also introduces a name mismatch between freeze_ and enable_, which IMO needs to be addressed right away (also in the same patch). > > 2. Get rid of __freeze_secondary_cpus(). > > I guess you're implying to drop the revert too and manually unroll it instead. IMO the revert is just an extra step with no real value, so why do it? > Could do. Thanks!
