On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 01:02:39PM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Tue, 2014-06-03 at 18:37 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 09:29:07AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > > > +bool irq_work_queue_on(struct irq_work *work, int cpu) > > > > +{ > > > > + /* All work should have been flushed before going offline */ > > > > + WARN_ON_ONCE(cpu_is_offline(cpu)); > > > > + > > > > + /* Arch remote IPI send/receive backend aren't NMI safe */ > > > > + WARN_ON_ONCE(in_nmi()); > > > > + > > > > + /* Only queue if not already pending */ > > > > + if (!irq_work_claim(work)) > > > > + return false; > > > > + > > > > + if (llist_add(&work->llnode, &per_cpu(raised_list, cpu))) > > > > + native_send_call_func_single_ipi(cpu); > > > > + > > > > + return true; > > > > +} > > > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(irq_work_queue_on); > > > > + > > > > > > I am curious, this should only compile on x86, right ? > > > > Oh, you tease, you forgot to say why you think this. > > > > Are you referring to the in_nmi() usage? that's from > > include/linux/hardirq.h, hardly x86 specific. > > No, my eyes were attracted by native_send_call_func_single_ipi()
Right, should be arch_send_call_function_single_ipi(). I'm like unable to get a correct patchset before at least 9 takes... -- 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/