On 05/23/2014 06:57 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 03:42:35PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
>> During CPU offline, in the stop-machine loop, we use 2 separate stages to
>> disable interrupts, to ensure that the CPU going offline doesn't get any new
>> IPIs from the other CPUs after it has gone offline.
>>
[...]
>> +/**
>> + * generic_smp_call_function_single_interrupt - Execute SMP IPI callbacks
>> + *
>> + * Invoked by arch to handle an IPI for call function single.
>> + * Must be called with interrupts disabled.
>> + */
>> +void generic_smp_call_function_single_interrupt(void)
>> +{
>> + static bool warned;
>> +
>> + WARN_ON(!irqs_disabled());
>> +
>> /*
>> * Shouldn't receive this interrupt on a cpu that is not yet online.
>> */
>> if (unlikely(!cpu_online(smp_processor_id()) && !warned)) {
>> + struct llist_node *entry;
>> + struct call_single_data *csd;
>> +
>> warned = true;
>> WARN(1, "IPI on offline CPU %d\n", smp_processor_id());
>>
>> + entry = llist_del_all(&__get_cpu_var(call_single_queue));
>
> This is deleting all the entries, the call to flush_smp_call_function_queue()
> will then miss these.
>
Argh! And I thought I had finally nailed it this time. :-(
Regards,
Srivatsa S. Bhat
>> + entry = llist_reverse_order(entry);
>
>
>
>> +
>> /*
>> * We don't have to use the _safe() variant here
>> * because we are not invoking the IPI handlers yet.
>> @@ -206,10 +250,7 @@ void generic_smp_call_function_single_interrupt(void)
>> csd->func);
>> }
>>
>> - llist_for_each_entry_safe(csd, csd_next, entry, llist) {
>> - csd->func(csd->info);
>> - csd_unlock(csd);
>> - }
>> + flush_smp_call_function_queue();
>> }
>>
>> /*
>>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
