From: tglx@linutronix.de (Thomas Gleixner)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 15/20] ARM/hw_breakpoint: Convert to hotplug state machine
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2016 14:42:15 +0100 (CET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1611181430070.3615@nanos> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161118132912.GM13470@arm.com>
On Fri, 18 Nov 2016, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 02:11:58PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > But it's guaranteed that cpuhp_setup_state() will not return before the
> > callback has been invoked on each online cpu.
>
> Ok, that's good.
>
> > If cpus are not yet online when that code is invoked, then it's the same
> > behaviour as before. It will be invoked when the cpu comes online.
>
> Just to check, but what stops a CPU from coming online between the call
> to cpuhp_setup_state and the call to cpuhp_remove_state_nocalls in the
> case of failure (debug_err_mask isn't empty)?
Indeed! I missed that part. So we still need a get/put_online_cpus()
protection around all of this.
Just for curiosity sake. Wouldn't it be simpler and less error prone to
make the ARM_DBG_READ/WRITE macros use the exception table and handle that
in the undefined instruction handler to avoid this hook dance?
Thanks,
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-11-18 13:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20161117183541.8588-1-bigeasy@linutronix.de>
2016-11-17 18:35 ` [PATCH 07/20] pci/xgene-msi: Convert to hotplug state machine Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2016-11-17 18:35 ` [PATCH 14/20] arm/bL_switcher: " Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2016-11-17 18:35 ` [PATCH 15/20] ARM/hw_breakpoint: " Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2016-11-18 12:04 ` Will Deacon
2016-11-18 13:11 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-18 13:29 ` Will Deacon
2016-11-18 13:42 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2016-11-18 13:48 ` Will Deacon
2016-11-18 13:59 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-11-18 14:11 ` Will Deacon
2017-01-02 14:15 ` Linus Walleij
2017-01-02 14:34 ` Linus Walleij
2017-01-02 15:00 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2017-01-02 20:15 ` Linus Walleij
2017-01-03 9:33 ` Mark Rutland
2017-01-04 11:27 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2017-01-04 13:56 ` Mark Rutland
2017-01-04 14:32 ` Will Deacon
2017-01-05 15:57 ` Mark Rutland
2017-01-05 15:26 ` Linus Walleij
2017-01-05 17:14 ` Mark Rutland
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=alpine.DEB.2.20.1611181430070.3615@nanos \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox