lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Jul]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH v1 13/70] x86, x2apic_cluster: _FROZEN Cleanup
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 10:48:52AM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 10:48:52 +0200
> From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
> To: "Chen, Gong" <gong.chen@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
> paulus@samba.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org, tony.luck@intel.com,
> hpa@zytor.com, jkosina@suse.cz, rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com,
> linux@arm.linux.org.uk, ralf@linux-mips.org, schwidefsky@de.ibm.com,
> davem@davemloft.net, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, fweisbec@gmail.com,
> cl@linux.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, axboe@kernel.dk,
> JBottomley@parallels.com, neilb@suse.de, christoffer.dall@linaro.org,
> rostedt@goodmis.org, rric@kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
> mhocko@suse.cz, david@fromorbit.com
> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 13/70] x86, x2apic_cluster: _FROZEN Cleanup
> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
> Well, look at the original code. What do you think happens if another
> _FROZEN action comes in which we don't handle in the switch-case?
>
> Take a piece of paper and play it through slowly if you don't see it.
> Hint: err = 0.
>
> > It looks like not quite comply with original logic. Once
> > new FROZEN logic is added, we have to update this code again. How
> > about using following code snippet:
> >
> > + if ((action & CPU_TASKS_FROZEN) &&
> > + ((action & ~CPU_TASKS_FROZEN) == CPU_UP_CANCELED)) {
> > + __update_clusterinfo(this_cpu);
> > + return NOTIFY_OK;
>
> No, this is different now from the original logic.
>
I'm silly. You are right. I will use your patch directly(I should do
it at the beginning :-)).
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-07-31 11:01    [W:0.115 / U:0.300 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site