From: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com>
To: "Randy.Dunlap" <rddunlap@osdl.org>, hari@in.ibm.com
Cc: akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andy Whitcroft <apw@shadowen.org>
Subject: Re: BUG_ON(!cpus_equal(cpumask, tmp));
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 16:22:35 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <187940000.1080692555@flay> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040330151729.1bd0c5d0.rddunlap@osdl.org>
>| We faced this problem starting 2.6.3 while working on kexec.
>|
>| The problem is because we now initialize cpu_vm_mask for init_mm with
>| CPU_MASK_ALL (from 2.6.3 onwards) which makes all bits in cpumask 1 (on SMP).
>| Hence BUG_ON(!cpus_equal(cpumask,tmp) fails. The change to set
>| cpu_vm_mask to CPU_MASK_ALL was done to remove tlb flush optimizations
>| for ppc64.
>|
>| I had posted a patch for this in the earlier thread. Reposting the same
>| here. This patch removes the assertion and uses "tmp" instead of cpumask.
>| Otherwise, we will end up sending IPIs to offline CPUs as well.
>|
>| Comments please.
>
> I'll just say that kexec fails without this patch and works with
> it applied, so I'd like to see it merged. If this patch isn't
> acceptable, let's find out why and try to make one that is.
>
> Thanks for the patch, Hari.
>From discussions with Andy, it seems this still has the same race as before
just smaller. I don't see how we can fix this properly without having some
locking on cpu_online_map .... probably RCU as it's massively read-biased
and we don't want to pay a spinlock cost to read it.
M.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-03-31 0:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-03-29 15:39 BUG_ON(!cpus_equal(cpumask, tmp)); Martin J. Bligh
2004-03-30 0:21 ` Andrew Morton
2004-03-30 0:25 ` Andrew Morton
2004-03-30 13:28 ` Hariprasad Nellitheertha
2004-03-30 23:17 ` Randy.Dunlap
2004-03-31 0:22 ` Martin J. Bligh [this message]
2004-03-31 0:39 ` Andrew Morton
2004-03-31 0:57 ` Martin J. Bligh
2004-03-31 1:11 ` Andrew Morton
2004-03-31 1:24 ` Martin J. Bligh
2004-03-31 1:36 ` Andrew Morton
2004-03-31 1:51 ` Martin J. Bligh
2004-03-31 4:43 ` Hariprasad Nellitheertha
2004-04-01 0:31 ` Andy Whitcroft
2004-04-01 5:04 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2004-04-01 11:38 ` Andy Whitcroft
2004-04-02 18:33 ` Randy.Dunlap
2004-04-01 8:42 ` Paul Jackson
2004-04-01 13:57 ` Hariprasad Nellitheertha
2004-04-03 1:45 ` Andy Whitcroft
2004-03-31 1:01 ` Andy Whitcroft
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-01-02 23:51 Martin J. Bligh
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=187940000.1080692555@flay \
--to=mbligh@aracnet.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=apw@shadowen.org \
--cc=hari@in.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rddunlap@osdl.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