From: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] thread_info: include <current.h> for THREAD_INFO_IN_TASK (WAS: [PATCH 2/3] sched/preempt: include asm/current.h)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 12:34:40 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161018103440.GA4061@osiris> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161017173315.GB23170@leverpostej>
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 06:33:15PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 03:48:13PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:42:25AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > When CONFIG_THREAD_INFO_IN_TASK is selected, the current_thread_info()
> > > macro relies on current having been defined prior to its use. However,
> > > not all users of current_thread_info() include <asm/current.h>, and thus
> > > current is not guaranteed to be defined.
> > >
> > > When CONFIG_THREAD_INFO_IN_TASK is not selected, it's possible that
> > > get_current() / current are based upon current_thread_info(), and
> > > <asm/current.h> includes <asm/thread_info.h>. Thus always including
> > > <asm/current.h> would result in circular dependences on some platforms.
> > >
> > > To ensure both cases work, this patch includes <asm/current.h>, but only
> > > when CONFIG_THREAD_INFO_IN_TASK is selected.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> > > ---
> > > include/linux/thread_info.h | 1 +
> > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > >
> > > As discussed, it would be great if this could go in along with the patch to
> > > make thread_info arch-specific again, to make merging the arch-specific parts
> > > easier (for arm64 and s390).
> >
> > Urrgh; I've just recalled that this patch alone is insufficient. The
> > h8300 arch code has an unfixed bug [1], and relies on some implicit
> > definition ordering that will be broken by this patch.
> >
> > I have a workaround/cleanup for core code that I'll send with an updated
> > version of my arm64 series shortly.
>
> Looks like I spoke too soon. I have another circular include issue with
> raw_smp_processor_id() and task_struct::cpu to solve -- it looks like
> s390 doesn't suffer from that per my reading of your headers.
That's correct.
> In the mean time, I've pushed out a branch [2] with the common patches,
> atop of v4.9-rc1.
I just verified that your branch works fine for s390 (with and without the
THREAD_INFO_IN_TASK conversion).
Thanks,
Heiko
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-18 10:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-13 11:57 [PATCH 0/3] THREAD_INFO_IN_TASK_STRUCT vs generic preemption code Heiko Carstens
2016-10-13 11:57 ` Heiko Carstens
2016-10-13 11:57 ` [PATCH 1/3] sched/core,x86: make struct thread_info arch specific again Heiko Carstens
2016-10-13 11:57 ` Heiko Carstens
2016-10-13 23:41 ` Mark Rutland
2016-10-13 23:51 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-10-13 11:57 ` [PATCH 2/3] sched/preempt: include asm/current.h Heiko Carstens
2016-10-13 23:25 ` Mark Rutland
2016-10-14 8:16 ` Heiko Carstens
2016-10-14 10:42 ` [PATCH] thread_info: include <current.h> for THREAD_INFO_IN_TASK (WAS: [PATCH 2/3] sched/preempt: include asm/current.h) Mark Rutland
2016-10-17 14:48 ` Mark Rutland
2016-10-17 17:33 ` Mark Rutland
2016-10-18 10:34 ` Heiko Carstens [this message]
2016-10-13 11:57 ` [PATCH 3/3] s390: move thread_info into task_struct Heiko Carstens
2016-10-13 21:52 ` [PATCH 0/3] THREAD_INFO_IN_TASK_STRUCT vs generic preemption code Andy Lutomirski
2016-10-13 21:52 ` Andy Lutomirski
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=20161018103440.GA4061@osiris \
--to=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).