* Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > This would be done totally serialized and while holding the hotplug
> > lock, so no CPU could go away or arrive while this operation is
> > going on.
>
> You said "the hotplug lock". That is the problem.
maybe i'm too dense today but i still dont see the fundamental problem.
Even with complex inter-subsystem interactions, hotplugging could be
effectively and scalably controlled via a self-recursive per-CPU mutex,
and a pointer to it embedded in task_struct:
struct task_struct {
...
int hotplug_depth;
struct mutex *hotplug_lock;
}
...
DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct mutex, hotplug_lock);
void cpu_hotplug_lock(void)
{
int cpu = raw_smp_processor_id();
/*
* Interrupts/softirqs are hotplug-safe:
*/
if (in_interrupt())
return;
if (current->hotplug_depth++)
return;
current->hotplug_lock = &per_cpu(hotplug_lock, cpu);
mutex_lock(current->hotplug_lock);
}
void cpu_hotplug_unlock(void)
{
int cpu;
if (in_interrupt())
return;
if (DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(!current->hotplug_depth))
return;
if (--current->hotplug_depth)
return;
mutex_unlock(current->hotplug_lock);
current->hotplug_lock = NULL;
}
...
void do_exit(void)
{
...
DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(current->hotplug_depth);
...
}
...
copy_process(void)
{
...
p->hotplug_depth = 0;
p->hotplug_lock = NULL;
...
}
50 lines of code at most. The only rule is to not use cpu_hotplug_lock()
in process-context non-preemptible code [interrupt contexts are
automatically ignored]. What am i missing?
Ingo
-
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/
