From: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
To: nacc@us.ibm.com
Cc: miltonm@bga.com, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Peter P Waskiewicz Jr <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [RESEND PATCH 1/2] IRQ: use cpu_possible_mask rather than online_mask in setup_affinity
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 14:26:17 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1285968378-12805-2-git-send-email-nacc@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1285968378-12805-1-git-send-email-nacc@us.ibm.com>
The use of online_mask requires architecture code to be hotplug-aware to
account for IRQ round-robin'ing. With user-driven dynamic SMT, this
could commonly occur even without physical hotplug. Without this change
and "pseries/xics: use cpu_possible_mask rather than cpu_all_mask", IRQs
are all routed to CPU0 on power machines with XICS not running
irqbalance.
Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
---
I have boot-tested this on ppc64, but not yet on x86/x86_64. This is
generic-code, and perhaps an audit of all .set_affinity functions should
occur before upstream acceptance?
---
kernel/irq/manage.c | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/irq/manage.c b/kernel/irq/manage.c
index c3003e9..ef85b95 100644
--- a/kernel/irq/manage.c
+++ b/kernel/irq/manage.c
@@ -175,7 +175,7 @@ static int setup_affinity(unsigned int irq, struct irq_desc *desc)
desc->status &= ~IRQ_AFFINITY_SET;
}
- cpumask_and(desc->affinity, cpu_online_mask, irq_default_affinity);
+ cpumask_and(desc->affinity, cpu_possible_mask, irq_default_affinity);
set_affinity:
desc->chip->set_affinity(irq, desc->affinity);
--
1.7.0.4
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-01 21:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-01 21:26 [RESEND PATCH 0/2] Fix IRQ round-robing w/o irqbalance on pseries Nishanth Aravamudan
2010-10-01 21:26 ` Nishanth Aravamudan [this message]
2010-10-02 10:57 ` [RESEND PATCH 1/2] IRQ: use cpu_possible_mask rather than online_mask in setup_affinity Thomas Gleixner
2010-10-06 20:55 ` Sonny Rao
2010-10-02 11:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-10-06 21:02 ` Sonny Rao
2010-10-11 18:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-10-11 19:52 ` Sonny Rao
2010-10-01 21:26 ` [RESEND PATCH 2/2] pseries/xics: use cpu_possible_mask rather than cpu_all_mask Nishanth Aravamudan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1285968378-12805-2-git-send-email-nacc@us.ibm.com \
--to=nacc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=ian.campbell@citrix.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miltonm@bga.com \
--cc=peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@intel.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®