Re: [PATCH V2] tmp patch to fix hotplug issue in CMCI storm

[Chen Gong <gong.chen@linux.intel.com>]

于 2012/6/18 20:23, Thomas Gleixner 写道:
> On Mon, 18 Jun 2012, Chen Gong wrote:
>> 于 2012/6/18 16:00, Thomas Gleixner 写道:
>>> On Mon, 18 Jun 2012, Chen Gong wrote:
>>>> index 92d8b5c..0493525 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce_intel.c
>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce_intel.c
>>>> @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ static DEFINE_RAW_SPINLOCK(cmci_discover_lock);
>>>>    static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, cmci_time_stamp);
>>>>    static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned int, cmci_storm_cnt);
>>>>    static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned int, cmci_storm_state);
>>>> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, cmci_storm_hcpu_status);
>>>
>>> Why do you insist on having another status variable, which does
>>> actually nothing than obfuscate the code?
>>>
>>> Look at the usage sites:
>>>
>>>>    		__this_cpu_write(cmci_storm_state, CMCI_STORM_SUBSIDED);
>>>> +		__this_cpu_write(cmci_storm_hcpu_status,
>>>> CMCI_STORM_HCPU_NONE);
>>
>> Because here I can't substitute CMCI_STORM_HCPU_NONE with
>> CMCI_STORM_SUBSIDED. If so, the status is chaos.
>
> Have you actually read what I wrote later? You do not neeed that extra
> state, period.
>

Oh, yes, you are right. I really don't take enough time on your reply.
I apology for it. Unconditionally clearing the state can avoid stale
CMCI_STORM_SUBSIDED status. Your logic is fine and simply my previous
unnecessarily complicated logic. Thanks a lot.

I will send the V3 tmp patch based on your previous 5 patches right now.
If OK, you can merge it into your 5th patch and I can write the comment
for this patch if you are OK.