[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20140506134054.8cd531296c8aa5d9c3eff958@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 13:40:54 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...nel.org,
tj@...nel.org, rusty@...tcorp.com.au, fweisbec@...il.com,
hch@...radead.org, mgorman@...e.de, riel@...hat.com, bp@...e.de,
rostedt@...dmis.org, mgalbraith@...e.de, ego@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, oleg@...hat.com, rjw@...ysocki.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] CPU hotplug, stop-machine: Plug race-window that
leads to "IPI-to-offline-CPU"
On Tue, 06 May 2014 23:33:03 +0530 "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> --- a/kernel/stop_machine.c
> +++ b/kernel/stop_machine.c
> @@ -165,12 +165,21 @@ static void ack_state(struct multi_stop_data *msdata)
> set_state(msdata, msdata->state + 1);
> }
>
> +/* Holding area for active CPUs, to let all the non-active CPUs go first */
> +static void hold_active_cpus(struct multi_stop_data *msdata,
> + int num_active_cpus)
> +{
> + /* Wait until all the non-active threads ack the state */
> + while (atomic_read(&msdata->thread_ack) > num_active_cpus)
> + cpu_relax();
> +}
The code comments are a bit lame. Can we do a better job of explaining
the overall dynamic behaviour? Help readers to understand the problem
which hold_active_cpus() is solving and how it solves it?
--
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