From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756348AbYHaRxm (ORCPT ); Sun, 31 Aug 2008 13:53:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754335AbYHaRxe (ORCPT ); Sun, 31 Aug 2008 13:53:34 -0400 Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.177]:30951 "EHLO py-out-1112.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753900AbYHaRxd (ORCPT ); Sun, 31 Aug 2008 13:53:33 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=cWi7cg5U97UVEcYSxyCVT0+o/Nax6SXrO2+wa5GEKKtt3+4b7HHACb6j13FzO3ldNI Ap9sm3YJXI4BSeDoq72xsHGINGYzs77YDpLNU/Smhc3mhC6b3c82kxLKlvSPs1zHNSMn JBUZ2Sp4GdIghcNl7UqQSgkN4uuULvlUTf1cU= Message-ID: <19f34abd0808311053m2fbaa711j5bfc846d81cf34b4@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2008 19:53:32 +0200 From: "Vegard Nossum" To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] prevent ia64 from invoking irq handlers on offline CPUs Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tony.luck@intel.com, jes@sgi.com, manfred@colorfullife.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org In-Reply-To: <20080831175100.GD7015@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20080831172814.GA15087@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <19f34abd0808311046g47907414wf3ef939d0a7bbfdb@mail.gmail.com> <20080831175100.GD7015@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 7:51 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: >> > @@ -751,6 +749,7 @@ int __cpu_disable(void) >> > remove_siblinginfo(cpu); >> > cpu_clear(cpu, cpu_online_map); Here ^^^ >> > fixup_irqs(); >> > + cpu_clear(cpu, cpu_online_map); >> > local_flush_tlb_all(); >> > cpu_clear(cpu, cpu_callin_map); >> > return 0; >> >> Hm. Maybe my eyes are going bad. But isn't that now clearing the cpu >> both before and after calling fixup_irqs()? > > I don't believe so... I removed the earlier one and added the later > one. Or is there another one hidden somewhere that I missed? See marker above. It's not removed, is it? Vegard -- "The animistic metaphor of the bug that maliciously sneaked in while the programmer was not looking is intellectually dishonest as it disguises that the error is the programmer's own creation." -- E. W. Dijkstra, EWD1036