[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <SJ1PR84MB30446EC71AAC4B36B00CFEC8E7D29@SJ1PR84MB3044.NAMPRD84.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Date: Sat, 21 May 2022 18:50:34 +0000
From: "Travis, Mike" <mike.travis@....com>
To: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"Dave Hansen" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Wahl, Steve" <steve.wahl@....com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
CC: "Sivanich, Dimitri" <dimitri.sivanich@....com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy@...radead.org>,
Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"Anderson, Russ" <russ.anderson@....com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org"
<platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
"Travis, Mike" <mike.travis@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/platform/uv: Dont use smp_processor_id while
preemptable
Thanks, I'll do that.
________________________________________
From: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2022 6:57 AM
To: Travis, Mike; Borislav Petkov; Dave Hansen; Ingo Molnar; Thomas Gleixner; Wahl, Steve; x86@...nel.org
Cc: Sivanich, Dimitri; Andy Shevchenko; Darren Hart; H. Peter Anvin; Anderson, Russ; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/platform/uv: Dont use smp_processor_id while preemptable
Hi Mike,
On 5/20/22 22:37, Mike Travis wrote:
> To avoid a "BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible" debug
> warning message, disable preemption around use of the processor id.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mike Travis <mike.travis@....com>
> Reviewed-by: Steve Wahl <steve.wahl@....com>
> Reviewed-by: Dimitri Sivanich <dimitri.sivanich@....com>
A git blame shows that this code has been around for quite
a while; so presumably this should be backported to some of
the stable kernel series ?
Maybe add an appropriate Cc: stable tag with the range of
kernels this should be added to and/or add a Fixes: tag?
Regards,
Hans
> ---
> arch/x86/platform/uv/uv_time.c | 9 ++++++---
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/uv/uv_time.c b/arch/x86/platform/uv/uv_time.c
> index 54663f3e00cb..094190814a28 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/platform/uv/uv_time.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/platform/uv/uv_time.c
> @@ -275,14 +275,17 @@ static int uv_rtc_unset_timer(int cpu, int force)
> */
> static u64 uv_read_rtc(struct clocksource *cs)
> {
> - unsigned long offset;
> + unsigned long offset, time;
> + unsigned int cpu = get_cpu();
>
> if (uv_get_min_hub_revision_id() == 1)
> offset = 0;
> else
> - offset = (uv_blade_processor_id() * L1_CACHE_BYTES) % PAGE_SIZE;
> + offset = (uv_cpu_blade_processor_id(cpu) * L1_CACHE_BYTES) % PAGE_SIZE;
>
> - return (u64)uv_read_local_mmr(UVH_RTC | offset);
> + time = (u64)uv_read_local_mmr(UVH_RTC | offset);
> + put_cpu();
> + return time;
> }
>
> /*
Powered by blists - more mailing lists