linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: fix BUG: using smp_processor_id() in touch_nmi_watchdog and touch_softlockup_watchdog
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 10:12:50 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100816141250.GU4879@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1281966418.1926.1421.camel@laptop>

On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 03:46:58PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > I don't see a problem with the patch, but my low level understanding of
> > the __get_cpu_var vs. per_cpu isn't very strong.
> 
> __get_cpu_var() gets you the value on the current cpu, per_cpu() takes a
> cpu argument.

Well I know that much. :-)  It seems that __get_cpu_var depends on
preemption being disabled whereas per_cpu does not?  Though for some
reason I thought __get_cpu_var would be more atomic when it grabbed the
current cpu such that you wouldn't need to disable preemption.  Guess not.

Cheers,
Don


  parent reply	other threads:[~2010-08-16 14:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-08-13 10:21 fix BUG: using smp_processor_id() in touch_nmi_watchdog and touch_softlockup_watchdog Sergey Senozhatsky
2010-08-16  8:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-08-16 13:34   ` Don Zickus
2010-08-16 13:46     ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-08-16 14:08       ` [PATCH] fix BUG " Sergey Senozhatsky
2010-08-16 14:30         ` Don Zickus
2010-08-17  4:27           ` Yong Zhang
2010-08-17  2:59         ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-08-17  3:16           ` Yong Zhang
2010-08-17  8:39             ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2010-08-17  9:05               ` Yong Zhang
2010-08-17  9:24                 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2010-08-17  9:37                   ` Yong Zhang
2010-08-17 10:28                     ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2010-08-17 12:48                       ` Yong Zhang
2010-08-17 10:39                     ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2010-08-17 12:56                       ` Yong Zhang
2010-08-17 13:13                       ` Don Zickus
2010-08-18  2:48                         ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-08-18 20:01                           ` Andrew Morton
2010-08-19  2:27                             ` Don Zickus
2010-08-20  2:57                             ` Don Zickus
2010-08-20  3:42                               ` Andrew Morton
2010-08-20 12:34                                 ` Don Zickus
2010-08-26 17:17                                 ` acpi_os_stall() and touch_nmi_watchdog() (was Re: [PATCH] fix BUG using smp_processor_id() in touch_nmi_watchdog and touch_softlockup_watchdog) Len Brown
2010-08-20 15:02                               ` [PATCH] fix BUG using smp_processor_id() in touch_nmi_watchdog and touch_softlockup_watchdog Yong Zhang
2010-08-26 10:14                               ` Maxim Levitsky
2010-08-26 14:40                                 ` Don Zickus
2010-08-17  7:56           ` [PATCH] fix BUG using smp_processor_id() in touch_nmi_watchdog and touch_softlockup_watchdog (v2) Sergey Senozhatsky
2010-08-16 14:12       ` Don Zickus [this message]
2010-08-16 14:29         ` fix BUG: using smp_processor_id() in touch_nmi_watchdog and touch_softlockup_watchdog Peter Zijlstra
2010-08-16 14:06     ` Yong Zhang
2010-08-18 19:33 ` Andrew Morton
2010-08-18 21:44   ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2010-09-22  9:00   ` [PATCH] avoid second smp_processor_id() call in __touch_watchdog Sergey Senozhatsky
2010-09-22 14:41     ` Don Zickus
2010-09-22 16:27     ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-09-22 16:39       ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-09-22 16:47         ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-09-24 19:34     ` Don Zickus
2010-09-25 17:43       ` Sergey Senozhatsky

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=20100816141250.GU4879@redhat.com \
    --to=dzickus@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).