From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [PULL] x86 cpumask work
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 13:33:16 +1030 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200903161333.16632.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090315060044.GE20949@elte.hu>
On Sunday 15 March 2009 16:30:44 Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > } else if (check_c1e_idle(c)) {
> > printk(KERN_INFO "using C1E aware idle routine\n");
> > - alloc_cpumask_var(&c1e_mask, GFP_KERNEL);
> > - cpumask_clear(c1e_mask);
> > + /* c1e_mask can only be NULL during boot of first cpu. */
> > + if (c1e_mask == NULL) {
> > + alloc_cpumask_var(&c1e_mask, GFP_KERNEL);
>
> Sigh, there are two bugs here:
>
> 1) what if the GFP_KERNEL allocation fails?
As the comments says, it can only be NULL during boot of the first CPU.
start_kernel -> check_bugs -> identify_boot_cpu -> identify_cpu
-> select_idle_routine.
Did you want me to panic if it fails?
> 2) this code is called with interrupts disabled, so a
> GFP_KERNEL allocation can be lethal.
I don't see that in my analysis of the code.
> c1e_mask should stay a static cpumask...
>
> Why do we convert static, standalone masks to cpumask_var?
Because we can't undefine struct cpumask while there are any left. If we
really want to we can make it a bitmap, but that's not a good thing to
encourage.
Hope that clarifies,
Rusty.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-03-16 3:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-12 4:23 [PULL] x86 cpumask work Rusty Russell
2009-03-12 10:26 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-12 10:37 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-12 22:54 ` Rusty Russell
2009-03-13 0:57 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-13 2:46 ` Rusty Russell
2009-03-13 3:20 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-13 4:34 ` Rusty Russell
2009-03-13 4:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-13 5:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-13 5:32 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-13 6:44 ` Rusty Russell
2009-03-13 13:12 ` Rusty Russell
2009-03-13 13:45 ` [tip:cpus4096] cpumask: convert node_to_cpumask_map[] to cpumask_var_t Rusty Russell
2009-03-13 15:27 ` [PULL] x86 cpumask work Ingo Molnar
2009-03-15 2:56 ` Rusty Russell
2009-03-15 6:00 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-16 3:03 ` Rusty Russell [this message]
2009-03-16 8:48 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-17 4:20 ` Rusty Russell
2009-03-17 10:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-17 21:27 ` Rusty Russell
2009-03-18 8:51 ` [tip:cpus4096] cpumask: fix CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK=y cpu hotunplug crash Rusty Russell
2009-03-13 13:13 ` [PATCH] Move numa_node_id default implementation to topology.h Rusty Russell
2009-03-13 13:45 ` [tip:cpus4096] numa, cpumask: move " Rusty Russell
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-03-17 18:56 [PULL] x86 cpumask work Cliff Wickman
2009-03-17 21:52 ` Rusty Russell
2009-03-18 12:57 ` Cliff Wickman
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=200903161333.16632.rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--to=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=travis@sgi.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.