linux-kernel - Re: [Resend Patch v4 14/16] smp, s390: Kill SMP single function call interrupt

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]

Date:	Fri, 23 Jan 2015 17:21:42 +0800
From:	Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
CC:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
	linux390@...ibm.com, Michael Holzheu <holzheu@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-s390@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Resend Patch v4 14/16] smp, s390: Kill SMP single function call
 interrupt

On 2015/1/23 14:54, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 01:36:53PM +0800, Jiang Liu wrote:
>> Commit 9a46ad6d6df3b54 "smp: make smp_call_function_many() use logic
>> similar to smp_call_function_single()" has unified the way to handle
>> single and multiple cross-CPU function calls. Now only one interrupt
>> is needed for architecture specific code to support generic SMP function
>> call interfaces, so kill the redundant single function call interrupt.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@...ux.intel.com>
>> Acked-by: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carst...@...ibm.com>
> 
> Is this really the patch I acked, whenever that was? Because the patch
> description doesn't match what your patch does.
> All it does is renaming ec_call_function_single to ec_call_function,
> nothing else.
> 
> Could you please resend with a proper patch description?
> Thanks!
> 
>> ---
>>  arch/s390/kernel/smp.c |   10 +++++-----
>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/smp.c b/arch/s390/kernel/smp.c
>> index 0b499f5cbe19..5b89eabc3a01 100644
>> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/smp.c
>> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/smp.c
>> @@ -50,7 +50,7 @@
>>
>>  enum {
>>  	ec_schedule = 0,
>> -	ec_call_function_single,
>> +	ec_call_function,
>>  	ec_stop_cpu,
>>  };
>>
>> @@ -416,8 +416,8 @@ static void smp_handle_ext_call(void)
>>  		smp_stop_cpu();
>>  	if (test_bit(ec_schedule, &bits))
>>  		scheduler_ipi();
>> -	if (test_bit(ec_call_function_single, &bits))
>> -		generic_smp_call_function_single_interrupt();
HI Heiko,
	The background is that the generic smp_call_xxx() interfaces
only use on interrupt now, previously it used two (FUNC_CALL and
FUNC_CALL_SINGLE). So the whole patch set is to kill
FUNC_CALL_SINGLE from all architectures.
	Above code kills generic_smp_call_function_single_interrupt().
We also replaces ec_call_function_single with ec_call_function so
only one interrupt will be used to support smp_call_xxx().
Regards!
Gerry

>> +	if (test_bit(ec_call_function, &bits))
>> +		generic_smp_call_function_interrupt();
>>  }
>>
>>  static void do_ext_call_interrupt(struct ext_code ext_code,
>> @@ -432,12 +432,12 @@ void arch_send_call_function_ipi_mask(const struct cpumask *mask)
>>  	int cpu;
>>
>>  	for_each_cpu(cpu, mask)
>> -		pcpu_ec_call(pcpu_devices + cpu, ec_call_function_single);
>> +		pcpu_ec_call(pcpu_devices + cpu, ec_call_function);
>>  }
>>
>>  void arch_send_call_function_single_ipi(int cpu)
>>  {
>> -	pcpu_ec_call(pcpu_devices + cpu, ec_call_function_single);
>> +	pcpu_ec_call(pcpu_devices + cpu, ec_call_function);
>>  }
>>
>>  #ifndef CONFIG_64BIT
>> -- 
>> 1.7.10.4
>>
> 
> --
> 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/
> 
--
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/