[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <E1LRy9o-0005WD-7N@eag09.americas.sgi.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 18:19:52 -0600
From: Cliff Wickman <cpw@....com>
To: tj@...nel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/10] x86: uv cleanup
Hi Tejun,
I appreciate your consolidation and cleanup of the UV code, relative
to 32 vs 64.
I have a question about the addition of the
WARN_ON(!in_atomic());
in uv_flush_tlb_others().
The patch is
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123252788121855&w=2
I expect this function to always entered preemptable.
Could you explain a bit about your thought behind this WARN_ON?
Thanks.
-Cliff
const struct cpumask *uv_flush_tlb_others(const struct cpumask *cpumask,
struct mm_struct *mm,
unsigned long va, unsigned int cpu)
{
static DEFINE_PER_CPU(cpumask_t, flush_tlb_mask);
struct cpumask *flush_mask = &__get_cpu_var(flush_tlb_mask);
int i;
int bit;
int blade;
int uv_cpu;
int this_blade;
int locals = 0;
struct bau_desc *bau_desc;
WARN_ON(!in_atomic());
cpumask_andnot(flush_mask, cpumask, cpumask_of(cpu));
uv_cpu = uv_blade_processor_id();
this_blade = uv_numa_blade_id();
--
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