All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCHv2 2/2] arm64: cpufeature: use static_branch_enable_cpuslocked()
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2017 11:07:29 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170428100729.GC13675@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170428100230.GA22621@leverpostej>

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 11:02:30AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 07:01:04PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 06:44:37PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c
> > > index f6cc67e..379ad8d 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c
> > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c
> > > @@ -175,9 +175,20 @@ void verify_local_cpu_errata_workarounds(void)
> > >  		}
> > >  }
> > >  
> > > -void update_cpu_errata_workarounds(void)
> > > +/*
> > > + * Secondary CPUs are booted with the waker holding the
> > > + * CPU hotplug lock, hence we don't need to lock it here again.
> > > + */
> > > +void update_secondary_cpu_errata_workarounds(void)
> > > +{
> > > +	update_cpu_capabilities(arm64_errata, "enabling workaround for");
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +void update_boot_cpu_errata_workarounds(void)
> > >  {
> > > +	get_online_cpus();
> > >  	update_cpu_capabilities(arm64_errata, "enabling workaround for");
> > > +	put_online_cpus();
> > >  }
> > 
> > These functions seem to have unhelpful names, especially when compared to
> > the naming scheme used by the core code. I'd prefer to have:
> > 
> > update_cpu_errata_workarounds: just calls update_cpu_capabilities
> > 
> > update_cpu_errata_workarounds_cpuslocked: does get_online_cpus(), then calls
> > update_cpu_errata_workarounds, then does put_online_cpus();
> 
> That's the opposite polarity to the other _cpuslocked functions, where
> _cpuslocked means that the lock is already held (and should not be taken
> by the _cpuslocked function itself.
> 
> So I'll make those changes, but I'll swap that so:
> update_cpu_errata_workarounds() does:
> 
>   get_online_cpus()
>   update_cpu_errata_workarounds_cpuslocked()
>   put_online_cpus()
> 
> > With that change:
> > 
> > Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> 
> I assume that will stand with the above change. Please shout if not!

Haha, yes, I got it downside-up. Thanks for working out what I meant.

Will

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bigeasy@linutronix.de,
	jbaron@akamai.com, peterz@infradead.org, rostedt@goodmis.org,
	suzuki.poulose@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 2/2] arm64: cpufeature: use static_branch_enable_cpuslocked()
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2017 11:07:29 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170428100729.GC13675@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170428100230.GA22621@leverpostej>

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 11:02:30AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 07:01:04PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 06:44:37PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c
> > > index f6cc67e..379ad8d 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c
> > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c
> > > @@ -175,9 +175,20 @@ void verify_local_cpu_errata_workarounds(void)
> > >  		}
> > >  }
> > >  
> > > -void update_cpu_errata_workarounds(void)
> > > +/*
> > > + * Secondary CPUs are booted with the waker holding the
> > > + * CPU hotplug lock, hence we don't need to lock it here again.
> > > + */
> > > +void update_secondary_cpu_errata_workarounds(void)
> > > +{
> > > +	update_cpu_capabilities(arm64_errata, "enabling workaround for");
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +void update_boot_cpu_errata_workarounds(void)
> > >  {
> > > +	get_online_cpus();
> > >  	update_cpu_capabilities(arm64_errata, "enabling workaround for");
> > > +	put_online_cpus();
> > >  }
> > 
> > These functions seem to have unhelpful names, especially when compared to
> > the naming scheme used by the core code. I'd prefer to have:
> > 
> > update_cpu_errata_workarounds: just calls update_cpu_capabilities
> > 
> > update_cpu_errata_workarounds_cpuslocked: does get_online_cpus(), then calls
> > update_cpu_errata_workarounds, then does put_online_cpus();
> 
> That's the opposite polarity to the other _cpuslocked functions, where
> _cpuslocked means that the lock is already held (and should not be taken
> by the _cpuslocked function itself.
> 
> So I'll make those changes, but I'll swap that so:
> update_cpu_errata_workarounds() does:
> 
>   get_online_cpus()
>   update_cpu_errata_workarounds_cpuslocked()
>   put_online_cpus()
> 
> > With that change:
> > 
> > Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> 
> I assume that will stand with the above change. Please shout if not!

Haha, yes, I got it downside-up. Thanks for working out what I meant.

Will

  reply	other threads:[~2017-04-28 10:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-04-27 17:44 [PATCHv2 0/2] arm64: fix hotplug rwsem boot fallout Mark Rutland
2017-04-27 17:44 ` Mark Rutland
2017-04-27 17:44 ` [PATCHv2 1/2] jump_label: Provide static_key_[enable|/slow_inc]_cpuslocked() Mark Rutland
2017-04-27 17:44   ` Mark Rutland
2017-04-27 17:44 ` [PATCHv2 2/2] arm64: cpufeature: use static_branch_enable_cpuslocked() Mark Rutland
2017-04-27 17:44   ` Mark Rutland
2017-04-27 18:01   ` Will Deacon
2017-04-27 18:01     ` Will Deacon
2017-04-28 10:02     ` Mark Rutland
2017-04-28 10:02       ` Mark Rutland
2017-04-28 10:07       ` Will Deacon [this message]
2017-04-28 10:07         ` Will Deacon

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=20170428100729.GC13675@arm.com \
    --to=will.deacon@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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.