From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
ak@suse.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm] x86_64 UP needs smp_call_function_single
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 15:14:05 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061130151405.d7e2dd08.randy.dunlap@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20061130142719.7474b4c0.akpm@osdl.org>
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006 14:27:19 -0800 Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Nov 2006 14:11:40 -0800
> Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 30 Nov 2006 08:00:00 +0100 Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, 2006-11-29 at 17:45 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > No, I think this patch is right - the declaration of the CONFIG_SMP
> > > > smp_call_function_single() is in linux/smp.h so the !CONFIG_SMP
> > > > declaration
> > > > or definition should be there too.
> > > >
> > > > It's still buggy though. It should disable local interrupts around
> > > > the
> > > > call to match the SMP version. I'll fix that separately.
> > >
> > > hm, didnt i send an updated patch for that already? See the patch below,
> > > from many days ago. I sent it after the tsc-sync-rewrite patch.
> >
> > Hi Ingo,
> >
> > Has there been a patch for this one? (UP again, not SMP)
> >
> > drivers/input/ff-memless.c:384: warning: implicit declaration of function 'local_bh_disable'
> > drivers/input/ff-memless.c:393: warning: implicit declaration of function 'local_bh_enable'
> >
> > Thanks,
> > ---
> > ~Randy
> > config: http://oss.oracle.com/~rdunlap/configs/config-input-up-header
>
> eww.. I guess linux/spinlock.h should really include linux/interrupt.h.
> But interrupt.h includes stuff like sched.h which will want spinlock.h.
>
> This, maybe?
Ack. Tested on UP and SMP x86_64.
> include/linux/bottom_half.h | 5 +++++
> include/linux/interrupt.h | 7 +------
> include/linux/spinlock.h | 1 +
> 3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff -puN /dev/null include/linux/bottom_half.h
> --- /dev/null
> +++ a/include/linux/bottom_half.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
> +extern void local_bh_disable(void);
> +extern void __local_bh_enable(void);
> +extern void _local_bh_enable(void);
> +extern void local_bh_enable(void);
> +extern void local_bh_enable_ip(unsigned long ip);
> diff -puN include/linux/interrupt.h~add-bottom_half.h include/linux/interrupt.h
> --- a/include/linux/interrupt.h~add-bottom_half.h
> +++ a/include/linux/interrupt.h
> @@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
> #include <linux/hardirq.h>
> #include <linux/sched.h>
> #include <linux/irqflags.h>
> +#include <linux/bottom_half.h>
> #include <asm/atomic.h>
> #include <asm/ptrace.h>
> #include <asm/system.h>
> @@ -217,12 +218,6 @@ static inline void __deprecated save_and
> #define save_and_cli(x) save_and_cli(&x)
> #endif /* CONFIG_SMP */
>
> -extern void local_bh_disable(void);
> -extern void __local_bh_enable(void);
> -extern void _local_bh_enable(void);
> -extern void local_bh_enable(void);
> -extern void local_bh_enable_ip(unsigned long ip);
> -
> /* PLEASE, avoid to allocate new softirqs, if you need not _really_ high
> frequency threaded job scheduling. For almost all the purposes
> tasklets are more than enough. F.e. all serial device BHs et
> diff -puN include/linux/spinlock.h~add-bottom_half.h include/linux/spinlock.h
> --- a/include/linux/spinlock.h~add-bottom_half.h
> +++ a/include/linux/spinlock.h
> @@ -52,6 +52,7 @@
> #include <linux/thread_info.h>
> #include <linux/kernel.h>
> #include <linux/stringify.h>
> +#include <linux/bottom_half.h>
>
> #include <asm/system.h>
---
~Randy
prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-11-30 23:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-11-30 1:01 [PATCH -mm] x86_64 UP needs smp_call_function_single Randy Dunlap
2006-11-30 1:45 ` Andrew Morton
2006-11-30 7:00 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-11-30 7:54 ` Andrew Morton
2006-11-30 9:22 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-11-30 9:35 ` Andrew Morton
2006-11-30 22:11 ` Randy Dunlap
2006-11-30 22:27 ` Andrew Morton
2006-11-30 22:31 ` Randy Dunlap
2006-11-30 23:14 ` Randy Dunlap [this message]
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=20061130151405.d7e2dd08.randy.dunlap@oracle.com \
--to=randy.dunlap@oracle.com \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
/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