lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Aug]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] fix BUG using smp_processor_id() in touch_nmi_watchdog and touch_softlockup_watchdog
From
On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 4:39 PM, Sergey Senozhatsky
<sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Why not use __raw_get_cpu_var() instead?
>> You know adding preempt protection in touch_softlockup_watchdog()
>> just suppress the warning. Am I missing something?
>>
>
> Sorry, my low level understanding of the __raw_get_cpu_var isn't very strong.
> I assume it uses current_thread_info()->cpu in some cases (right?) or
> percpu_from_op.

The difference is __raw_get_cpu_var() is using raw_smp_processor_id().

>
>
> Should it be
> acpi_os_stall
>        preepmt_disable
>        touch_nmi_watchdog
>                touch_softlockup_watchdog
>        preempt_enable

Actually I don't think this is helpful for the whole function. Because
if acpi_os_stall()
migrate(I don't know if it could) to another CPU just before
preepmt_disable(), we'll
be on the wrong way. Adding preempt protection is just smoothing the warning.

So I prefer using __raw_get_cpu_var() as what we have been done before.

Thanks,
Yong
--
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: 2010-08-17 11:07    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans