Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1628382
| From | Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/3] jump_label: Pull get_online_cpus() into generic code |
| Date | 2017-04-21 19:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tyKef-8vc-67@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <txyI9-54q-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <txyIb-54q-19@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 04/18/2017 06:32 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> This change does two things; it moves the get_online_cpus() call into
> generic code, with the aim of later providing some static_key ops that
> avoid it.
>
> And as a side effect it inverts the relation between cpu_hotplug_lock
> and jump_label_mutex.
>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
> ---
...
> @@ -146,6 +154,7 @@ static void __static_key_slow_dec(struct
> * returns is unbalanced, because all other static_key_slow_inc()
> * instances block while the update is in progress.
> */
> + get_online_cpus();
> if (!atomic_dec_and_mutex_lock(&key->enabled, &jump_label_mutex)) {
> WARN(atomic_read(&key->enabled) < 0,
> "jump label: negative count!\n");
So the get and put can be unbalanced here since the above:
'if (!atomic_dec_and_mutex_lock(&key->enabled, &jump_label_mutex))'
is followed by 'return;'. However, I see that the next patch removes
this and so things are balanced again...
> @@ -159,6 +168,7 @@ static void __static_key_slow_dec(struct
> jump_label_update(key);
> }
> jump_label_unlock();
> + put_online_cpus();
> }
>
> static void jump_label_update_timeout(struct work_struct *work)
> @@ -592,6 +602,10 @@ jump_label_module_notify(struct notifier
>
> switch (val) {
> case MODULE_STATE_COMING:
> + /*
> + * XXX do we need get_online_cpus() ? the module isn't
> + * executable yet, so nothing should be looking at our code.
> + */
Since we're just updating the table of places we potentially need to
patch, but not actually doing any patching, we should not need
get_online_cpus() here...so in attempt to reduce confusion I would
remove this.
Thanks,
-Jason
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH 0/3] more cpu hotplug fail Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-04-18 12:40 +0200
[PATCH 3/3] perf: Avoid cpu_hotplug_lock r-r recursion Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-04-18 12:40 +0200
[tip:smp/hotplug] perf: Avoid cpu_hotplug_lock r-r recursion "tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <tipbot@zytor.com> - 2017-04-20 13:40 +0200
[PATCH 1/3] jump_label: Pull get_online_cpus() into generic code Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-04-18 12:40 +0200
[tip:smp/hotplug] jump_label: Pull get_online_cpus() into generic code "tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <tipbot@zytor.com> - 2017-04-20 13:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/3] jump_label: Pull get_online_cpus() into generic code Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com> - 2017-04-21 19:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/3] jump_label: Pull get_online_cpus() into generic code Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-04-21 19:10 +0200
csiph-web