linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/6] mm: Use raw_cpu ops for determining current NUMA node

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <00000141c1a55f44-e50c78e7-4b77-49de-b475-21e04cd4f418-000000@email.amazonses.com>
Date:	Wed, 16 Oct 2013 14:22:22 +0000
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
cc:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, akpm@...uxfoundation.org,
	rostedt@...dmis.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] mm: Use raw_cpu ops for determining current NUMA
 node

On Wed, 16 Oct 2013, Peter Zijlstra wrote:


> NAK; smp_processor_id() has the preemption checks; for consistently
> numa_node_id() should have them too, for the very same reason. Who's to
> say the node id is still valid when you return from this function? If
> we're preemptable we could've just been migrated away to another node.
>
> So please introduce raw_numa_node_id() and use that; all fully analogous
> to smp_processor_id().

The code that was here before the use of this_cpu ops did use
raw_smp_processor_id.

--
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/