Subject: [PATCH -v8 11/11] Move arch/x86 reboot= handling to generic kernel.

From: [email-masked] (Robin Holt)
Date: Thu, 9 May 2013 06:29:16 -0500

On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 01:50:29PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue,  7 May 2013 09:39:55 -0500 Robin Holt <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> > Merge together the unicore32, arm, and x86 reboot= command line
> > parameter handling.
> > 
> > ...
> >
> > +static int __init reboot_setup(char *str)
> > +{
> > +	for (;;) {
> > +		/*
> > +		 * Having anything passed on the command line via
> > +		 * reboot= will cause us to disable DMI checking
> > +		 * below.
> > +		 */
> > +		reboot_default = 0;
> > +
> > +		switch (*str) {
> > +#if defined(CONFIG_X86) || defined(CONFIG_X86_64)
> > +		case 'w':
> > +			reboot_mode = REBOOT_WARM;
> > +			break;
> > +
> > +		case 'c':
> > +			reboot_mode = REBOOT_COLD;
> > +			break;
> > +
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> > +		case 's':
> > +			if (isdigit(*(str+1))) {
> > +				reboot_cpu = (int) (*(str+1) - '0');
> > +				if (isdigit(*(str+2)))
> > +					reboot_cpu = reboot_cpu*10 + (int)(*(str+2) - '0');
> > +			}
> 
> Boy, that's some weird stuff.
> 
> What's wrong with doing
> 
> 			if (isdigit(str[1])) {
> 				reboot_cpu = str[1] - '0';
> 				if (isdigit(str[2]))
> 					reboot_cpu = reboot_cpu * 10 +
> 							str[2] - '0';
> 			}
> 
> ?
> 
> But it's still nonsense - we should eliminate its
> you-have-less-than-101-CPUs restriction by using, you know, atoi().

I had an earlier version which I must have dropped which handled the
larger parsing, but I do like your suggestion of using atoi.  I will
submit a -v9 in a few hours.

Robin