[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5a5c67c1-9f45-f908-2c8d-0914cd616a18@synopsys.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2018 13:19:01 -0700
From: Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@...opsys.com>
To: Alexey Brodkin <Alexey.Brodkin@...opsys.com>
CC: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: Do we need to disable preemption in flush_tlb_range()?
+CC Peter since we have his attention ;-)
On 03/01/2018 07:13 AM, Alexey Brodkin wrote:
> Hi Vineet,
>
> Just noticed that in comments for smp_call_function_many() it is said that
> preemption must be disabled during its execution. And that function gets executed
> among other ways like that:
> -------------------------->8-----------------------
> flush_tlb_range()
> -> on_each_cpu_mask()
> -> smp_call_function_many()
> -------------------------->8-----------------------
In general I prefer not to - Peter what say you ?
>
> I'm not seeing right now any real problem with current implementation but
> some architectures do that thus the question.
>
> -Alexey
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists