[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <x49fvs2pgjx.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 13:52:50 -0400
From: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>
To: jaxboe@...ionio.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: blk_mq_update_queue_map makes an (invalid?) assumption about cpu ordering
Hi, Jens,
blk_mq_update_queue_map does this:
for_each_possible_cpu(i) {
if (!cpu_online(i)) {
map[i] = 0;
continue;
}
...
first_sibling = get_first_sibling(i);
if (first_sibling == i) {
map[i] = cpu_to_queue_index(nr_uniq_cpus, nr_queues,
queue);
queue++;
} else
map[i] = map[first_sibling];
This assumes that the first_sibling is listed before any other siblings,
which I don't believe is true. I don't think you get any guaranteed
ordering in that cpu_possible_mask.
... or did I miss something?
Cheers,
Jeff
--
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