From: Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>
To: Nathan Lynch <ntl@pobox.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@in.ibm.com>,
Rusty Russel <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@in.ibm.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Paul E McKenney <paulmck@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/4] Rename lock_cpu_hotplug to get_online_cpus
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 13:27:02 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071018075702.GB15281@in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071017161308.GD6773@localdomain>
Hi Nathan,
> Hi Gautham-
>
> Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
> > Replace all lock_cpu_hotplug/unlock_cpu_hotplug from the kernel and use
> > get_online_cpus and put_online_cpus instead as it highlights
> > the refcount semantics in these operations.
>
> Something other than "get_online_cpus", please? lock_cpu_hotplug()
> protects cpu_present_map as well as cpu_online_map. For example, some
> of the powerpc code modified in this patch is made a bit less clear
> because it is manipulating cpu_present_map, not cpu_online_map.
A quick look at the code, and I am wondering why is lock_cpu_hotplug()
used there in the first place. It doesn't look like we require any
protection against cpus coming up/ going down in the code below,
since the cpu-hotplug operation doesn't affect the cpu_present_map.
Can't we use another mutex here instead of the cpu_hotplug mutex here ?
>
>
> > Index: linux-2.6.23/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hotplug-cpu.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-2.6.23.orig/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hotplug-cpu.c
> > +++ linux-2.6.23/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hotplug-cpu.c
> > @@ -151,7 +151,7 @@ static int pseries_add_processor(struct
> > for (i = 0; i < nthreads; i++)
> > cpu_set(i, tmp);
> >
> > - lock_cpu_hotplug();
> > + get_online_cpus();
> >
> > BUG_ON(!cpus_subset(cpu_present_map, cpu_possible_map));
> >
> > @@ -188,7 +188,7 @@ static int pseries_add_processor(struct
> > }
> > err = 0;
> > out_unlock:
> > - unlock_cpu_hotplug();
> > + put_online_cpus();
> > return err;
> > }
> >
> > @@ -209,7 +209,7 @@ static void pseries_remove_processor(str
> >
> > nthreads = len / sizeof(u32);
> >
> > - lock_cpu_hotplug();
> > + get_online_cpus();
> > for (i = 0; i < nthreads; i++) {
> > for_each_present_cpu(cpu) {
> > if (get_hard_smp_processor_id(cpu) != intserv[i])
> > @@ -223,7 +223,7 @@ static void pseries_remove_processor(str
> > printk(KERN_WARNING "Could not find cpu to remove "
> > "with physical id 0x%x\n", intserv[i]);
> > }
> > - unlock_cpu_hotplug();
> > + put_online_cpus();
> > }
--
Gautham R Shenoy
Linux Technology Center
IBM India.
"Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain,
because Freedom is priceless!"
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-10-18 7:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-10-16 10:33 [RFC PATCH 0/4] Refcount Based Cpu-Hotplug Revisit Gautham R Shenoy
2007-10-16 10:34 ` [RFC PATCH 1/4] Refcount Based Cpu-Hotplug Implementation Gautham R Shenoy
2007-10-17 0:47 ` Rusty Russell
2007-10-17 5:37 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2007-10-17 6:29 ` Rusty Russell
2007-10-18 6:29 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2007-10-21 12:47 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-10-17 10:53 ` Paul Jackson
2007-10-17 11:27 ` Paul Jackson
2007-10-17 11:50 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2007-10-17 12:04 ` Paul Jackson
2007-10-16 10:35 ` [RFC PATCH 2/4] Rename lock_cpu_hotplug to get_online_cpus Gautham R Shenoy
2007-10-17 16:13 ` Nathan Lynch
2007-10-18 7:57 ` Gautham R Shenoy [this message]
2007-10-18 8:22 ` Nathan Lynch
2007-10-18 8:59 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2007-10-18 17:30 ` Nathan Lynch
2007-10-19 5:04 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2007-10-22 0:43 ` Nathan Lynch
2007-10-22 4:51 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2007-10-16 10:36 ` [RFC PATCH 3/4] Replace per-subsystem mutexes with get_online_cpus Gautham R Shenoy
2007-10-21 11:39 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-10-22 4:58 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2007-10-16 10:37 ` [RFC PATCH 4/4] Remove CPU_DEAD/CPU_UP_CANCELLED handling from workqueue.c Gautham R Shenoy
2007-10-17 11:57 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-10-16 17:20 ` [RFC PATCH 0/4] Refcount Based Cpu-Hotplug Revisit Linus Torvalds
2007-10-17 2:11 ` Dipankar Sarma
2007-10-17 2:23 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-10-17 4:17 ` Gautham R Shenoy
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=20071018075702.GB15281@in.ibm.com \
--to=ego@in.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=ntl@pobox.com \
--cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
--cc=paulmck@us.ibm.com \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=vatsa@in.ibm.com \
/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
Powered by JetHome