From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Donghai Qiao <dqiao@redhat.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, sfr@canb.auug.org.au, arnd@arndb.de,
heying24@huawei.com, andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com,
axboe@kernel.dk, rdunlap@infradead.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
gor@linux.ibm.com, donghai.w.qiao@gmail.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/11] smp: eliminate SCF_WAIT and SCF_RUN_LOCAL
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2022 11:10:05 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220425091005.GE2731@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220422200040.93813-4-dqiao@redhat.com>
On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 04:00:32PM -0400, Donghai Qiao wrote:
> The commit a32a4d8a815c ("smp: Run functions concurrently in
> smp_call_function_many_cond()") was to improve the concurrent
> of the cross call execution between local and remote. The change
> in smp_call_function_many_cond() did what was intended, but the
> new macro SCF_WAIT and SCF_RUN_LOCAL and the code around them
> to handle local call were not unnecessary because the modified
> function smp_call_function_many() was able to handle the local
> cross call. So these two macros can be eliminated and the code
> implemented around that can be removed as well.
Maybe I've not had enough wake-up-juice, but I can't parse the above,
what?!
> @@ -787,23 +787,13 @@ int smp_call_function_any(const struct cpumask *mask,
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(smp_call_function_any);
>
> -/*
> - * Flags to be used as scf_flags argument of smp_call_function_many_cond().
> - *
> - * %SCF_WAIT: Wait until function execution is completed
> - * %SCF_RUN_LOCAL: Run also locally if local cpu is set in cpumask
> - */
> -#define SCF_WAIT (1U << 0)
> -#define SCF_RUN_LOCAL (1U << 1)
> -
> static void smp_call_function_many_cond(const struct cpumask *mask,
> smp_call_func_t func, void *info,
> - unsigned int scf_flags,
> + bool wait,
> smp_cond_func_t cond_func)
> {
> int cpu, last_cpu, this_cpu = smp_processor_id();
> struct call_function_data *cfd;
> - bool wait = scf_flags & SCF_WAIT;
> bool run_remote = false;
> bool run_local = false;
> int nr_cpus = 0;
> @@ -829,14 +819,14 @@ static void smp_call_function_many_cond(const struct cpumask *mask,
> WARN_ON_ONCE(!in_task());
>
> /* Check if we need local execution. */
> - if ((scf_flags & SCF_RUN_LOCAL) && cpumask_test_cpu(this_cpu, mask))
> + if (cpumask_test_cpu(this_cpu, mask))
> run_local = true;
>
> /* Check if we need remote execution, i.e., any CPU excluding this one. */
> cpu = cpumask_first_and(mask, cpu_online_mask);
> if (cpu == this_cpu)
> cpu = cpumask_next_and(cpu, mask, cpu_online_mask);
> - if (cpu < nr_cpu_ids)
> + if ((unsigned int)cpu < nr_cpu_ids)
> run_remote = true;
>
> if (run_remote) {
> @@ -911,12 +901,8 @@ static void smp_call_function_many_cond(const struct cpumask *mask,
> * @mask: The set of cpus to run on (only runs on online subset).
> * @func: The function to run. This must be fast and non-blocking.
> * @info: An arbitrary pointer to pass to the function.
> - * @wait: Bitmask that controls the operation. If %SCF_WAIT is set, wait
> - * (atomically) until function has completed on other CPUs. If
> - * %SCF_RUN_LOCAL is set, the function will also be run locally
> - * if the local CPU is set in the @cpumask.
> - *
> - * If @wait is true, then returns once @func has returned.
> + * @wait: If wait is true, the call will not return until func()
> + * has completed on other CPUs.
> *
> * You must not call this function with disabled interrupts or from a
> * hardware interrupt handler or from a bottom half handler. Preemption
> @@ -925,7 +911,7 @@ static void smp_call_function_many_cond(const struct cpumask *mask,
> void smp_call_function_many(const struct cpumask *mask,
> smp_call_func_t func, void *info, bool wait)
> {
> - smp_call_function_many_cond(mask, func, info, wait * SCF_WAIT, NULL);
> + smp_call_function_many_cond(mask, func, info, wait, NULL);
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(smp_call_function_many);
This changes the semantics of smp_call_function_many(), before this, if
self was in the mask it wouldn't call @func, now it will.
I appreciate you want to clean that up, but you can't do that without
auditing all callers.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-25 9:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-22 20:00 [PATCH v2 00/11] smp: cross CPU call interface Donghai Qiao
2022-04-22 20:00 ` [PATCH v2 01/11] smp: consolidate the structure definitions to smp.h Donghai Qiao
2022-04-23 4:57 ` kernel test robot
2022-04-25 8:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-04-25 9:52 ` Thomas Gleixner
2022-04-22 20:00 ` [PATCH v2 02/11] smp: define the cross call interface Donghai Qiao
2022-04-25 9:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-04-22 20:00 ` [PATCH v2 03/11] smp: eliminate SCF_WAIT and SCF_RUN_LOCAL Donghai Qiao
2022-04-25 9:10 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2022-04-22 20:00 ` [PATCH v2 04/11] smp: replace smp_call_function_single() with smp_call() Donghai Qiao
2022-04-25 9:33 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-04-22 20:00 ` [PATCH v2 05/11] smp: replace smp_call_function_single_async() with smp_call_private() Donghai Qiao
2022-04-23 7:30 ` kernel test robot
2022-04-24 22:06 ` Nathan Chancellor
2022-04-25 9:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-04-22 20:00 ` [PATCH v2 06/11] smp: use smp_call_private() fron irq_work.c and core.c Donghai Qiao
2022-04-25 9:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-04-22 20:00 ` [PATCH v2 07/11] smp: change smp_call_function_any() to smp_call_any() Donghai Qiao
2022-04-22 20:00 ` [PATCH v2 08/11] smp: replace smp_call_function_many_cond() with __smp_call_mask_cond() Donghai Qiao
2022-04-22 20:00 ` [PATCH v2 09/11] smp: replace smp_call_function_single_async with smp_call_private Donghai Qiao
2022-04-22 20:00 ` [PATCH v2 10/11] smp: replace smp_call_function_single() with smp_call() Donghai Qiao
2022-04-22 20:00 ` [PATCH v2 11/11] smp: modify up.c to adopt the same format of cross CPU call Donghai Qiao
2022-04-23 5:17 ` kernel test robot
2022-04-23 5:58 ` kernel test robot
2022-04-26 14:00 ` [PATCH v2 00/11] smp: cross CPU call interface Christoph Hellwig
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=20220425091005.GE2731@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=donghai.w.qiao@gmail.com \
--cc=dqiao@redhat.com \
--cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=heying24@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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