From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: benh@kernel.crashing.org (Benjamin Herrenschmidt)
Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2011 17:14:14 +1100
Subject: [PATCH] sched: provide scheduler_ipi() callback in response to
	smp_send_reschedule()
In-Reply-To: <1297086859.13327.16.camel@laptop>
References: <1295262433.30950.53.camel@laptop>
	<1297034792.14982.10.camel@pasglop> <1297086859.13327.16.camel@laptop>
Message-ID: <1297232054.14982.346.camel@pasglop>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Mon, 2011-02-07 at 14:54 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-02-07 at 10:26 +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > You missed:
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c
> > index 9813605..467d122 100644
> > --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c
> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c
> > @@ -98,6 +98,7 @@ void smp_message_recv(int msg)
> >                 break;
> >         case PPC_MSG_RESCHEDULE:
> >                 /* we notice need_resched on exit */
> > +               scheduler_ipi();
> >                 break;
> >         case PPC_MSG_CALL_FUNC_SINGLE:
> >                 generic_smp_call_function_single_interrupt();
> > 
> > Fold that in and add:
> > 
> > Acked-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
> 
> Thanks Ben!

BTW. I we lurking at some of our CPU hotplug code and I think I cannot
totally guarantee that this won't be called on an offline CPU. If that's
a problem, you may want to add a test for that.

IE. The call function IPIs are normally not going to be sent to an
offlined CPU, and stop_machine should be a good enough fence here, but
we do abuse reschedule for a number of things (including in some case
to wake up a sleeping CPU that was pseudo-offlined :-)

Cheers,
Ben.