From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com>
Cc: rddunlap@osdl.org, hari@in.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
apw@shadowen.org
Subject: Re: BUG_ON(!cpus_equal(cpumask, tmp));
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 16:39:28 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040330163928.7cafae3d.akpm@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <187940000.1080692555@flay>
"Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com> wrote:
>
> > 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.
We do want to avoid adding stuff to the IPI path. If the going-away CPU
still responds to IPIs after it has gone away then do we actually need to
do anything? For x86, at least?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-03-31 0:37 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
2004-03-31 0:39 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
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=20040330163928.7cafae3d.akpm@osdl.org \
--to=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=apw@shadowen.org \
--cc=hari@in.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mbligh@aracnet.com \
--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