[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c0473294-bf14-f9b8-325c-bc860361733a@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 14:58:35 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, x86@...nel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] x86/apic: Use non-atomic operations when possible
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/x2apic_cluster.c b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/x2apic_cluster.c
> index 7685444a106b..609e499387a1 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/x2apic_cluster.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/x2apic_cluster.c
> @@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ __x2apic_send_IPI_mask(const struct cpumask *mask, int vector, int apic_dest)
> cpumask_copy(tmpmsk, mask);
> /* If IPI should not be sent to self, clear current CPU */
> if (apic_dest != APIC_DEST_ALLINC)
> - cpumask_clear_cpu(smp_processor_id(), tmpmsk);
> + __cpumask_clear_cpu(smp_processor_id(), tmpmsk);
tmpmsk is on-stack, but it's a pointer to a per-cpu variable:
tmpmsk = this_cpu_cpumask_var_ptr(ipi_mask);
So this one doesn't appear as obviously correct as a mask which itself
is on the stack. The other three look obviously OK, though.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists