From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
Cc: lenb@kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, efault@gmx.de, len.brown@intel.com,
mingo@elte.hu, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, tglx@linutronix.de,
venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com, yakui.zhao@intel.com,
yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [patch for 2.6.30 2/2] arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c: avoid cross-CPU interrupts
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 17:46:44 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090411174644.ea6f63c6.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090412000605.GA23869@redhat.com>
On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 20:06:05 -0400 Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 11:17:18PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> >
> > In drv_read(), check to see whether we can run the rdmsr() on the current
> > CPU. If so, do that. So smp_call_function_single() can avoid the IPI.
>
> Wouldn't it be a better to make smp_call_function_single do this check
> itself, so all callers benefit from this optimisation?
>
> *looks*
>
> Wait, won't this already be caught by this code in smp_call_function_single() ?
>
> 286 this_cpu = get_cpu();
> ...
> 291 if (cpu == this_cpu) {
> 292 local_irq_save(flags);
> 293 func(info);
> 294 local_irq_restore(flags);
> 295 } else {
>
>
>
The problem is that the caller (acpi-cpufreq) is doing
cpu = cpumask_any(mask);
smp_call_function_single(cpu);
and cpumask_any(mask) does cpumask_first(mask). Which might be a
different CPU, even though this thread of control is running on a CPU
which is present in `mask'.
- We could fix this by making cpumask_any(mask) return this-cpu if
this-cpu is present `mask'.
- We could fix this by changing smp_call_function_single() to take a
mask, rather than a particular CPU. Then of course it preferentially
chooses this-cpu if possible.
Or write a new smp_call_function_any(mask, ...);
I suspect that changing cpumask_any() to preferentially return this-cpu
will always give us the behaviour that we prefer, but I haven't looked
into it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-12 0:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-04-11 6:17 [patch for 2.6.30 2/2] arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c: avoid cross-CPU interrupts akpm
2009-04-11 6:37 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-04-12 0:06 ` Dave Jones
2009-04-12 0:46 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2009-04-14 8:51 ` Rusty Russell
2009-04-14 17:18 ` Andrew Morton
2009-04-15 6:35 ` Rusty Russell
2009-04-20 3:22 ` Len Brown
2009-04-20 2:57 ` Len Brown
2009-04-20 3:20 ` Andrew Morton
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=20090411174644.ea6f63c6.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com \
--cc=yakui.zhao@intel.com \
--cc=yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.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