[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100817025954.GA12366@nowhere>
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 04:59:56 +0200
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix BUG using smp_processor_id() in touch_nmi_watchdog
and touch_softlockup_watchdog
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 05:08:29PM +0300, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> void touch_softlockup_watchdog(void)
> {
> - __get_cpu_var(watchdog_touch_ts) = 0;
> + int this_cpu = get_cpu();
> + per_cpu(watchdog_touch_ts, this_cpu) = 0;
> + put_cpu();
> }
If preemption is disabled and you deal with the current cpu,
then please use __get_cpu_var, it makes the code more
readable:
void touch_softlockup_watchdog(void)
{
preempt_disable();
__get_cpu_var(watchdog_touch_ts) = 0;
preempt_enable();
}
Same below.
Thanks.
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(touch_softlockup_watchdog);
>
> @@ -142,7 +143,9 @@ void touch_all_softlockup_watchdogs(void)
> #ifdef CONFIG_HARDLOCKUP_DETECTOR
> void touch_nmi_watchdog(void)
> {
> - __get_cpu_var(watchdog_nmi_touch) = true;
> + int this_cpu = get_cpu();
> + per_cpu(watchdog_nmi_touch, this_cpu) = true;
> + put_cpu();
> touch_softlockup_watchdog();
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(touch_nmi_watchdog);
>
> --
> 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/
--
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