On 09/10/12 04:30, Roger Quadros wrote: > gets rid of below messages with CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT enabled > > [ 28.832916] debug_smp_processor_id: 18 callbacks suppressed > [ 28.832946] BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible [00000000] code: > modprobe/1763 > [ 28.841491] caller is pwrdm_set_next_pwrst+0x54/0x120 > > changes in v2: > - rebased on 3.6-rc5 > - use put_cpu() immediately after get_cpu() in omap3_pm_idle() > > Signed-off-by: Roger Quadros <rog...@ti.com> > --- > arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock.c | 9 ++++++--- > arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm34xx.c | 12 ++++++++---- > arch/arm/mach-omap2/powerdomain.c | 6 ++++-- > 3 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock.c > index ea3f565..06747b6 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock.c > @@ -285,7 +285,8 @@ void omap2_clk_disable(struct clk *clk) > pr_debug("clock: %s: disabling in hardware\n", clk->name); > > if (clk->ops && clk->ops->disable) { > - trace_clock_disable(clk->name, 0, smp_processor_id()); > + trace_clock_disable(clk->name, 0, get_cpu()); > + put_cpu();
Why are you doing this? Why not just use raw_smp_processor_id()? Do you really care about the CPU number? get_cpu() and put_cpu() are about non-preemptible sections where you want to ensure the CPU the code is operating on is actually on that CPU. How about just put 0 all the time because the CPU number is already part of the trace event? -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html