* Linus Torvalds <torva...@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 4:48 AM, Linus Torvalds
> <torva...@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > Does that smaller patch work equally well?
>
> .. and here's a properly formatted email and patch.
>
> Linus
> kernel/smp.c | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/smp.c b/kernel/smp.c
> index 2aaac2c47683..07854477c164 100644
> --- a/kernel/smp.c
> +++ b/kernel/smp.c
> @@ -159,8 +159,10 @@ static int generic_exec_single(int cpu, struct
> call_single_data *csd,
> }
>
>
> - if ((unsigned)cpu >= nr_cpu_ids || !cpu_online(cpu))
> + if ((unsigned)cpu >= nr_cpu_ids || !cpu_online(cpu)) {
> + csd_unlock(csd);
> return -ENXIO;
> + }
Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org>
Btw., in this case we should probably also generate a WARN_ONCE()
warning?
I _think_ most such callers calling an SMP function call for offline
or out of range CPUs are at minimum racy.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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/
