mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, tj@kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com,
	der.herr@hofr.at, dave@stgolabs.net, riel@redhat.com,
	viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/6] stop_machine: kill stop_cpus_mutex and stop_cpus_lock
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 03:08:11 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150630010811.GB22559@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150629085127.GF19282@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>

On 06/29, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 06:02:51AM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> > If we change stop_two_cpus() to use stop_work_alloc_one() it can use
> > cpu_online(),
>
> So the one user of this actually needs cpu_active(); we do not want to
> go move tasks to an inactive cpu.
>
> So if you change this to cpu_online() we need to audit the user is doing
> the stricter test.

Hmm. But the user (migrate_swap_stop) should check cpu_active() anyway?

The cpu_active() checks in stop_two_cpus() can only help to ensure that
multi_cpu_stop() won't hang. CPU_DOWN_PREPARE can deactivate either CPU
right after the check?

Or stop_two_cpus() needs get_online_cpus(). Or I missed something.

Oleg.


  reply	other threads:[~2015-06-30  1:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-06-26  2:14 Oleg Nesterov
2015-06-26  2:15 ` [RFC PATCH 1/6] stop_machine: move cpu_stopper_task and stop_cpus_work into struct cpu_stopper Oleg Nesterov
2015-06-26  2:15 ` [RFC PATCH 2/6] stop_machine: don't do for_each_cpu() twice in queue_stop_cpus_work() Oleg Nesterov
2015-06-26  2:15 ` [RFC PATCH 3/6] stop_machine: introduce stop_work_alloc() and stop_work_free() Oleg Nesterov
2015-06-26  2:15 ` [RFC PATCH 4/6] stop_machine: kill stop_cpus_mutex Oleg Nesterov
2015-06-26  2:15 ` [RFC PATCH 5/6] stop_machine: change stop_two_cpus() just use stop_cpu(), kill lg_double_lock/unlock Oleg Nesterov
2015-06-26  2:15 ` [RFC PATCH 6/6] stop_machine: optimize stop_work_alloc() Oleg Nesterov
2015-06-29  8:56   ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-06-26  2:31 ` [RFC PATCH 0/6] stop_machine: kill stop_cpus_mutex and stop_cpus_lock Oleg Nesterov
2015-06-26 12:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-06-26 20:46   ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-06-29  4:02     ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-06-29  8:51       ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-06-30  1:08         ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2015-06-29  8:49     ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-06-30  1:03       ` Oleg Nesterov

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=20150630010811.GB22559@redhat.com \
    --to=oleg@redhat.com \
    --cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
    --cc=der.herr@hofr.at \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
    /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