[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANRm+Cx4g=_BSB23Dk7TcWGGfGVcNtOWHmA+6+=+BX2JRAkaRw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 16:32:53 +0800
From: Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@...mail.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/apic: Fix suspicious RCU usage in smp_trace_call_function_interrupt
2016-09-15 16:58 GMT+08:00 Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>:
> On Thu, 15 Sep 2016, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>> ---
>> arch/x86/include/asm/apic.h | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/apic.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/apic.h
>> index 1243577..71c1fe2 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/apic.h
>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/apic.h
>> @@ -650,8 +650,8 @@ static inline void entering_ack_irq(void)
>>
>> static inline void ipi_entering_ack_irq(void)
>> {
>> - ack_APIC_irq();
>> irq_enter();
>> + ack_APIC_irq();
>> }
>
> which makes ipi_entering_ack_irq() the same as entering_ack_irq() and
> therefor pointless.
>
> Looking further we have the same issue in exiting_ack_irq() where we call
> ack_APIC_irq() after irq_exit().
Do you think I should fix both ipi_entering_ack_irq() and exiting_ack_irq()?
Regards,
Wanpeng Li
Powered by blists - more mailing lists