On 06/25/2014 04:19 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 03:24:11PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: >> Wait, that was a stupid idea. hotplug_cfd() already invokes irq_work_run >> indirectly via flush_smp_call_function_queue(). So irq_work_cpu_notify() >> doesn't need to invoke it again, AFAIU. So perhaps we can get rid of >> irq_work_cpu_notify() altogether? > > Just so... > > getting up at 6am and sitting in an airport terminal doesn't seem to > agree with me; any more silly fail here? > > --- > Subject: irq_work: Remove BUG_ON in irq_work_run() > From: Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]> > Date: Wed Jun 25 07:13:07 CEST 2014 > > Because of a collision with 8d056c48e486 ("CPU hotplug, smp: flush any > pending IPI callbacks before CPU offline"), which ends up calling > hotplug_cfd()->flush_smp_call_function_queue()->irq_work_run(), which > is not from IRQ context. > > And since that already calls irq_work_run() from the hotplug path, > remove our entire hotplug handling.
Tested-by: Stephen Warren <[email protected]> [with the s/static// already mentioned in this thread, obviously:-)] -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
