[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20241009180253.777965-3-paulmck@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2024 11:02:51 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To: frederic@...nel.org,
rcu@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-team@...a.com,
rostedt@...dmis.org,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH rcu 3/5] refscale: Correct affinity check
The current affinity check works fine until there are more reader
processes than CPUs, at which point the affinity check is looking for
non-existent CPUs. This commit therefore applies the same modulus to
the check as is present in the set_cpus_allowed_ptr() call.
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
---
kernel/rcu/refscale.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/refscale.c b/kernel/rcu/refscale.c
index 639d1cfc657b2..af32331ef645a 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/refscale.c
+++ b/kernel/rcu/refscale.c
@@ -863,7 +863,7 @@ ref_scale_reader(void *arg)
goto end;
// Make sure that the CPU is affinitized appropriately during testing.
- WARN_ON_ONCE(raw_smp_processor_id() != me);
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(raw_smp_processor_id() != me % nr_cpu_ids);
WRITE_ONCE(rt->start_reader, 0);
if (!atomic_dec_return(&n_started))
--
2.40.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists