From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751982AbeCNUTN (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Mar 2018 16:19:13 -0400 Received: from us01smtprelay-2.synopsys.com ([198.182.47.9]:41824 "EHLO smtprelay.synopsys.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751381AbeCNUTK (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Mar 2018 16:19:10 -0400 Subject: Re: Do we need to disable preemption in flush_tlb_range()? To: Alexey Brodkin CC: Peter Zijlstra , "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org" Newsgroups: gmane.linux.kernel,gmane.linux.kernel.cross-arch,gmane.linux.kernel.arc References: <1519917189.13866.6.camel@synopsys.com> From: Vineet Gupta Message-ID: <5a5c67c1-9f45-f908-2c8d-0914cd616a18@synopsys.com> Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2018 13:19:01 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1519917189.13866.6.camel@synopsys.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.10.161.84] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org +CC Peter since we have his attention ;-) On 03/01/2018 07:13 AM, Alexey Brodkin wrote: > Hi Vineet, > > Just noticed that in comments for smp_call_function_many() it is said that > preemption must be disabled during its execution. And that function gets executed > among other ways like that: > -------------------------->8----------------------- > flush_tlb_range() > -> on_each_cpu_mask() > -> smp_call_function_many() > -------------------------->8----------------------- In general I prefer not to - Peter what say you ? > > I'm not seeing right now any real problem with current implementation but > some architectures do that thus the question. > > -Alexey >