lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Feb]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: CPU hotplug and IRQ affinity with 2.6.24-rt1
>>> On Tue, Feb 5, 2008 at 11:59 AM, in message
<20080205165936.GA18613@dwalker1.mvista.com>, Daniel Walker
<dwalker@dwalker1.mvista.com> wrote:

>
> I looked at the code a bit, and I'm not sure you need this complexity..
> Once you have replace the old_rq, there is no reason it needs to
> protection of the run queue spinlock .. So you could just move the kfree
> down below the spin_unlock_irqrestore() ..

Here is a new version to address your observation:
-----------------------

we cannot kfree while in_atomic()

Signed-off-by: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com>

diff --git a/kernel/sched.c b/kernel/sched.c
index e6ad493..0978912 100644
--- a/kernel/sched.c
+++ b/kernel/sched.c
@@ -6226,6 +6226,7 @@ static void rq_attach_root(struct rq *rq, struct root_domain *rd)
{
unsigned long flags;
const struct sched_class *class;
+ struct root_domain *reap = NULL;

spin_lock_irqsave(&rq->lock, flags);

@@ -6241,7 +6242,7 @@ static void rq_attach_root(struct rq *rq, struct root_domain *rd)
cpu_clear(rq->cpu, old_rd->online);

if (atomic_dec_and_test(&old_rd->refcount))
- kfree(old_rd);
+ reap = old_rd;
}

atomic_inc(&rd->refcount);
@@ -6257,6 +6258,10 @@ static void rq_attach_root(struct rq *rq, struct root_domain *rd)
}

spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rq->lock, flags);
+
+ /* Don't try to free the memory while in-atomic() */
+ if (unlikely(reap))
+ kfree(reap);
}



>
> Daniel
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-02-05 19:35    [W:0.362 / U:0.024 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site