From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752779AbbAWGyT (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Jan 2015 01:54:19 -0500 Received: from e06smtp15.uk.ibm.com ([195.75.94.111]:39998 "EHLO e06smtp15.uk.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751116AbbAWGyQ (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Jan 2015 01:54:16 -0500 Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 07:54:10 +0100 From: Heiko Carstens To: Jiang Liu Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Martin Schwidefsky , linux390@de.ibm.com, Michael Holzheu , "Srivatsa S. Bhat" , Borislav Petkov , Tony Luck , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Resend Patch v4 14/16] smp, s390: Kill SMP single function call interrupt Message-ID: <20150123065410.GA5101@osiris> References: <1421991416-20297-1-git-send-email-jiang.liu@linux.intel.com> <1421991416-20297-15-git-send-email-jiang.liu@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1421991416-20297-15-git-send-email-jiang.liu@linux.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 15012306-0021-0000-0000-000002A75E53 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 01:36:53PM +0800, Jiang Liu wrote: > Commit 9a46ad6d6df3b54 "smp: make smp_call_function_many() use logic > similar to smp_call_function_single()" has unified the way to handle > single and multiple cross-CPU function calls. Now only one interrupt > is needed for architecture specific code to support generic SMP function > call interfaces, so kill the redundant single function call interrupt. > > Signed-off-by: Jiang Liu > Acked-by: Heiko Carstens Is this really the patch I acked, whenever that was? Because the patch description doesn't match what your patch does. All it does is renaming ec_call_function_single to ec_call_function, nothing else. Could you please resend with a proper patch description? Thanks! > --- > arch/s390/kernel/smp.c | 10 +++++----- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/smp.c b/arch/s390/kernel/smp.c > index 0b499f5cbe19..5b89eabc3a01 100644 > --- a/arch/s390/kernel/smp.c > +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/smp.c > @@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ > > enum { > ec_schedule = 0, > - ec_call_function_single, > + ec_call_function, > ec_stop_cpu, > }; > > @@ -416,8 +416,8 @@ static void smp_handle_ext_call(void) > smp_stop_cpu(); > if (test_bit(ec_schedule, &bits)) > scheduler_ipi(); > - if (test_bit(ec_call_function_single, &bits)) > - generic_smp_call_function_single_interrupt(); > + if (test_bit(ec_call_function, &bits)) > + generic_smp_call_function_interrupt(); > } > > static void do_ext_call_interrupt(struct ext_code ext_code, > @@ -432,12 +432,12 @@ void arch_send_call_function_ipi_mask(const struct cpumask *mask) > int cpu; > > for_each_cpu(cpu, mask) > - pcpu_ec_call(pcpu_devices + cpu, ec_call_function_single); > + pcpu_ec_call(pcpu_devices + cpu, ec_call_function); > } > > void arch_send_call_function_single_ipi(int cpu) > { > - pcpu_ec_call(pcpu_devices + cpu, ec_call_function_single); > + pcpu_ec_call(pcpu_devices + cpu, ec_call_function); > } > > #ifndef CONFIG_64BIT > -- > 1.7.10.4 >