[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100118165443.GB29764@Krystal>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 11:54:43 -0500
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, rostedt@...dmis.org,
Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mingo@...e.hu, tglx@...utronix.de, andi@...stfloor.org,
roland@...hat.com, rth@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/8] jump label v4 - x86: Introduce generic jump
patching without stop_machine
* Arjan van de Ven (arjan@...radead.org) wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010 10:59:30 -0500
> Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> > Yeah, so in the latest patch, I updated it to use int3 even if
> > len == 1. :-)
> >
>
>
> int3 is not making a difference for your case; there is no guarantee
> that the other processor even sees the "int3 inbetween state" at all;
> if it's not safe without int3 then it won't be safe with int3 either.
What Masami means is that he updated his patch to use the int3+IPI
broadcast scheme.
Therefore, the CPUs not seeing the int3 inbetween state will be forced
to issue a serializing instruction while the int3 is in place anyway.
Thanks,
Mathieu
>
>
> --
> Arjan van de Ven Intel Open Source Technology Centre
> For development, discussion and tips for power savings,
> visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
--
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