![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Thu, 2004-04-08 at 00:17, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote: > On Wed, Apr 07, 2004 at 03:32:12PM +1000, Rusty Russell wrote: > > But other tasks can do a getaffinity() on it and see the wrong affinity. > > Probably not a big issue. > > hmm .. the fact that getaffinity reads the cpus_allowed mask w/o doing > lock_cpu_hotplug makes it already racy wrt setaffinity? But that's OK: that's a user race. It's like reading a file at the same time as writing it. > Maybe it needs to take CPU hotplug sem before it reads the mask? Yes, taking it in both syscalls would work, too. > I would like to run my stress tests for longer time before I send it > for inclusion (i would be on vacation till next tuesday ..so maybe i will send > in the patch after that!) Thanks. BTW, can you take a look at the FIXME: in xics.c and change it to be dynamic. Joel is having trouble proving it's a problem, and yet Anton assures me that ioremap is needed, so CPUs not present at boot which are brought in should be failing... Thanks! Rusty. -- Anyone who quotes me in their signature is an idiot -- Rusty Russell - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 13:02 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||