[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <52DAD2B1.2050401@zytor.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2014 11:14:57 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@...ine.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tip tree
On 01/18/2014 07:21 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Sat, 2014-01-18 at 13:44 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 10:46:06AM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>>>
>>> I hope it doesn't look quite like that, next-20140117 is -ENOBOOT on
>>> Q6600 box. See below for an alternative.
>>
>> Urgh, I see, we call the idle arch_cpu_idle() callback with irqs
>> disabled.
>>
>> Could something like this work?
>>
>> local_irq_enable();
>> mwait_idle_with_hints(0,0);
>>
>> The interrupt enable window is slightly larger, but I'm not immediately
>> seeing a problem with that.
>
> Yup, works just fine. Less is more.
>
> Nice to see a _progression_ in the pipe too btw.
>
This means an interrupt window is open and we can take an interrupt
between checking need_resched and the MWAIT, which couldn't happen with
__sti_mwait().
Are we sure that is actually safe?
-hpa
--
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