From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: PowerPC BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible code
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 22:07:55 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1298581675.5226.840.camel@laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1102241216420.1708@sister.anvils>
On Thu, 2011-02-24 at 12:47 -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
Lovely problem :-), benh mentioned it on IRC, but I never got around to
finding the email thread, thanks for the CC.
> What would be better for 2.6.38 and 2.6.37-stable? Moving that call to
> vunmap_page_range back under vb->lock, or the partial-Peter-patch below?
> And then what should be done for 2.6.39?
I think you'll also need the arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c changes that
cause context switches to flush the tlb_batch queues.
> --- 2.6.38-rc5/arch/powerpc/mm/tlb_hash64.c 2010-02-24 10:52:17.000000000 -0800
> +++ linux/arch/powerpc/mm/tlb_hash64.c 2011-02-15 23:27:21.000000000 -0800
> @@ -38,13 +38,11 @@ DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct ppc64_tlb_batch, p
> * neesd to be flushed. This function will either perform the flush
> * immediately or will batch it up if the current CPU has an active
> * batch on it.
> - *
> - * Must be called from within some kind of spinlock/non-preempt region...
> */
> void hpte_need_flush(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr,
> pte_t *ptep, unsigned long pte, int huge)
> {
> - struct ppc64_tlb_batch *batch = &__get_cpu_var(ppc64_tlb_batch);
> + struct ppc64_tlb_batch *batch = &get_cpu_var(ppc64_tlb_batch);
> unsigned long vsid, vaddr;
> unsigned int psize;
> int ssize;
> @@ -99,6 +97,7 @@ void hpte_need_flush(struct mm_struct *m
> */
> if (!batch->active) {
> flush_hash_page(vaddr, rpte, psize, ssize, 0);
> + put_cpu_var(ppc64_tlb_batch);
> return;
> }
>
> @@ -127,6 +126,7 @@ void hpte_need_flush(struct mm_struct *m
> batch->index = ++i;
> if (i >= PPC64_TLB_BATCH_NR)
> __flush_tlb_pending(batch);
> + put_cpu_var(ppc64_tlb_batch);
> }
>
> /*
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-02-24 21:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-12-29 22:54 PowerPC BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible code Hugh Dickins
2010-12-30 1:26 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-12-30 10:45 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-02-24 20:47 ` Hugh Dickins
2011-02-24 21:07 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2011-02-24 21:23 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-02-24 21:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-02-24 21:12 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
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=1298581675.5226.840.camel@laptop \
--to=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.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).