[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2011 22:10:34 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
CC: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] x86: stop machine text poke should issue sync core
On 02/28/2011 07:24 AM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>
> Index: linux-2.6-lttng/arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6-lttng.orig/arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c
> +++ linux-2.6-lttng/arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c
> @@ -612,6 +612,12 @@ static int __kprobes stop_machine_text_p
>
> flush_icache_range((unsigned long)tpp->addr,
> (unsigned long)tpp->addr + tpp->len);
> + /*
> + * Intel Archiecture Software Developer's Manual section 7.1.3 specifies
> + * that a core serializing instruction such as "cpuid" should be
> + * executed on _each_ core before the new instruction is made visible.
> + */
> + sync_core();
> return 0;
> }
>
Isn't this executed from an IPI handler, which will return with IRET (a
serializing instruction) anyway?
-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists