[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3E5A0FA7E9CA944F9D5414FEC6C712205A59505E@ORSMSX106.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 23:42:19 +0000
From: "Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
To: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] x86: Add check for number of available vectors before
CPU down
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Prarit Bhargava [mailto:prarit@...hat.com]
>
> Second try at this ...
>
> Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=64791
>
> When a cpu is downed on a system, the irqs on the cpu are assigned to
> other cpus. It is possible, however, that when a cpu is downed there
> aren't enough free vectors on the remaining cpus to account for the
> vectors from the cpu that is being downed.
>
> This results in an interesting "overflow" condition where irqs are
> "assigned" to a CPU but are not handled.
>
> For example, when downing cpus on a 1-64 logical processor system:
>
> + if (per_cpu(vector_irq, cpu)[vector] < 0)
> + count++;
But later on fixup_irqs will set some of vector_irq vector as -1 on this
to-be-disabled cpu. That will release vectors assigned to this cpu. So
checking vector_irq at this point before fixup_irqs doesn't make sense, right?
Thanks.
-Fenghua
--
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