[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1329850623.2293.419.camel@twins>
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 19:57:03 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, laijs@...fujitsu.com,
dipankar@...ibm.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca, josh@...htriplett.org,
niv@...ibm.com, tglx@...utronix.de, rostedt@...dmis.org,
Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu, dhowells@...hat.com,
eric.dumazet@...il.com, darren@...art.com, fweisbec@...il.com,
patches@...aro.org, Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 3/4] rcu: stop spurious warnings from
synchronize_sched_expedited
On Tue, 2012-02-21 at 10:28 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 07:00:17PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-02-21 at 09:58 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > From: Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
> > >
> > > synchronize_sched_expedited() is spamming CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT=y
> > > users with an unintended warning from the cpu_is_offline() check:
> > > use raw_smp_processor_id() instead of smp_processor_id() there.
> >
> > This fails to mention why it makes sense to test a random cpu for
> > offline-ness..
>
> The check was already there, Hugh simply fixed it to use raw_. The check
> itself was added in c0d6d01bf (Check for illegal use of RCU from offlined
> CPUs). The purpose is to catch improper use of RCU from CPU_DYING
> notifiers and on the path from the CPU_DYING notifiers to the idle loop.
Then I think this patch wants to add a comment explaining this. Because
cpu_offline(raw_smp_processor_id()) looks really rather suspicious.
--
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