[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1345440349.30835.3.camel@ymzhang.sh.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 13:25:49 +0800
From: Yanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>
To: "Liu, Chuansheng" <chuansheng.liu@...el.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/fixup_irq: using the cpu_online_mask instead of
cpu_all_mask
On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 06:55 +0000, Liu, Chuansheng wrote:
> From: liu chuansheng <chuansheng.liu@...el.com>
> Subject: [PATCH] x86/fixup_irq: using the cpu_online_mask instead of cpu_all_mask
>
> When one CPU is going down, and this CPU is the last one in irq affinity,
> current code is setting cpu_all_mask as the new affinity for that irq.
>
> But for some system the firmware maybe send the interrupt to each CPU
> in irq affinity averagely, and cpu_all_mask include all CPUs.
>
> Here replacing cpu_all_mask with cpu_online_mask, it is more reasonable
> and fittable.
It's a good finding. The issue exists on Medfield Android mobile.
>
> Signed-off-by: liu chuansheng <chuansheng.liu@...el.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/irq.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c b/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c
> index 7ad683d..d44f782 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c
> @@ -270,7 +270,7 @@ void fixup_irqs(void)
>
> if (cpumask_any_and(affinity, cpu_online_mask) >= nr_cpu_ids) {
> break_affinity = 1;
> - affinity = cpu_all_mask;
> + affinity = cpu_online_mask;
> }
>
> chip = irq_data_get_irq_chip(data);
--
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