From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933555Ab3BSSbi (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Feb 2013 13:31:38 -0500 Received: from e28smtp07.in.ibm.com ([122.248.162.7]:40340 "EHLO e28smtp07.in.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933537Ab3BSSbf (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Feb 2013 13:31:35 -0500 Message-ID: <5123C482.5070704@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 23:59:22 +0530 From: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120828 Thunderbird/15.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk CC: tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org, tj@kernel.org, oleg@redhat.com, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, mingo@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, namhyung@kernel.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, wangyun@linux.vnet.ibm.com, xiaoguangrong@linux.vnet.ibm.com, rjw@sisk.pl, sbw@mit.edu, fweisbec@gmail.com, linux@arm.linux.org.uk, nikunj@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 29/45] x86/xen: Use get/put_online_cpus_atomic() to prevent CPU offline References: <20130122073210.13822.50434.stgit@srivatsabhat.in.ibm.com> <20130122074046.13822.61950.stgit@srivatsabhat.in.ibm.com> <20130219181038.GB18244@phenom.dumpdata.com> In-Reply-To: <20130219181038.GB18244@phenom.dumpdata.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 13021918-8878-0000-0000-000005F4B994 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 02/19/2013 11:40 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 01:10:51PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: >> Once stop_machine() is gone from the CPU offline path, we won't be able to >> depend on preempt_disable() or local_irq_disable() to prevent CPUs from >> going offline from under us. >> >> Use the get/put_online_cpus_atomic() APIs to prevent CPUs from going offline, >> while invoking from atomic context. >> >> Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk > > Weird. I see this in the patch but I don't see it in the header? Meaning, you didn't get this email at all? > Did you > explicitly suppress the CC part? > No.. I sent the entire patchset to a set of email ids and in addition to that I CC'ed individual patches to the respective maintainers/lists (the CC: list in the changelog). I used the --auto knob from stgit to do that. > > Anyhow, the patch looks sane enough, thought I need to to run it through > a test framework just to be on a sure side. > Sure, thank you. But you might want to test the v6 that I sent out yesterday instead of v5. Oh, wait a min, you didn't get the v6 mail also? Here it is, for your reference: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=136119260122255&w=2 Regards, Srivatsa S. Bhat >> Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge >> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" >> Cc: x86@kernel.org >> Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com >> Cc: virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org >> Signed-off-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat >> --- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e28smtp09.in.ibm.com (e28smtp09.in.ibm.com [122.248.162.9]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "e28smtp09.in.ibm.com", Issuer "GeoTrust SSL CA" (not verified)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 77CB32C0085 for ; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 05:31:38 +1100 (EST) Received: from /spool/local by e28smtp09.in.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 23:59:36 +0530 Received: from d28relay05.in.ibm.com (d28relay05.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.62]) by d28dlp01.in.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34128E0053 for ; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 00:02:21 +0530 (IST) Received: from d28av02.in.ibm.com (d28av02.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.64]) by d28relay05.in.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id r1JIVLwR31719448 for ; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 00:01:21 +0530 Received: from d28av02.in.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d28av02.in.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id r1JIVLmm012840 for ; Wed, 20 Feb 2013 05:31:23 +1100 Message-ID: <5123C482.5070704@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 23:59:22 +0530 From: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 29/45] x86/xen: Use get/put_online_cpus_atomic() to prevent CPU offline References: <20130122073210.13822.50434.stgit@srivatsabhat.in.ibm.com> <20130122074046.13822.61950.stgit@srivatsabhat.in.ibm.com> <20130219181038.GB18244@phenom.dumpdata.com> In-Reply-To: <20130219181038.GB18244@phenom.dumpdata.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, fweisbec@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux@arm.linux.org.uk, xiaoguangrong@linux.vnet.ibm.com, wangyun@linux.vnet.ibm.com, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, nikunj@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, rostedt@goodmis.org, rjw@sisk.pl, namhyung@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, oleg@redhat.com, sbw@mit.edu, tj@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 02/19/2013 11:40 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 01:10:51PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: >> Once stop_machine() is gone from the CPU offline path, we won't be able to >> depend on preempt_disable() or local_irq_disable() to prevent CPUs from >> going offline from under us. >> >> Use the get/put_online_cpus_atomic() APIs to prevent CPUs from going offline, >> while invoking from atomic context. >> >> Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk > > Weird. I see this in the patch but I don't see it in the header? Meaning, you didn't get this email at all? > Did you > explicitly suppress the CC part? > No.. I sent the entire patchset to a set of email ids and in addition to that I CC'ed individual patches to the respective maintainers/lists (the CC: list in the changelog). I used the --auto knob from stgit to do that. > > Anyhow, the patch looks sane enough, thought I need to to run it through > a test framework just to be on a sure side. > Sure, thank you. But you might want to test the v6 that I sent out yesterday instead of v5. Oh, wait a min, you didn't get the v6 mail also? Here it is, for your reference: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=136119260122255&w=2 Regards, Srivatsa S. Bhat >> Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge >> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" >> Cc: x86@kernel.org >> Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com >> Cc: virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org >> Signed-off-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat >> --- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com (Srivatsa S. Bhat) Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2013 23:59:22 +0530 Subject: [PATCH v5 29/45] x86/xen: Use get/put_online_cpus_atomic() to prevent CPU offline In-Reply-To: <20130219181038.GB18244@phenom.dumpdata.com> References: <20130122073210.13822.50434.stgit@srivatsabhat.in.ibm.com> <20130122074046.13822.61950.stgit@srivatsabhat.in.ibm.com> <20130219181038.GB18244@phenom.dumpdata.com> Message-ID: <5123C482.5070704@linux.vnet.ibm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 02/19/2013 11:40 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 01:10:51PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote: >> Once stop_machine() is gone from the CPU offline path, we won't be able to >> depend on preempt_disable() or local_irq_disable() to prevent CPUs from >> going offline from under us. >> >> Use the get/put_online_cpus_atomic() APIs to prevent CPUs from going offline, >> while invoking from atomic context. >> >> Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk > > Weird. I see this in the patch but I don't see it in the header? Meaning, you didn't get this email at all? > Did you > explicitly suppress the CC part? > No.. I sent the entire patchset to a set of email ids and in addition to that I CC'ed individual patches to the respective maintainers/lists (the CC: list in the changelog). I used the --auto knob from stgit to do that. > > Anyhow, the patch looks sane enough, thought I need to to run it through > a test framework just to be on a sure side. > Sure, thank you. But you might want to test the v6 that I sent out yesterday instead of v5. Oh, wait a min, you didn't get the v6 mail also? Here it is, for your reference: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=136119260122255&w=2 Regards, Srivatsa S. Bhat >> Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge >> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" >> Cc: x86 at kernel.org >> Cc: xen-devel at lists.xensource.com >> Cc: virtualization at lists.linux-foundation.org >> Signed-off-by: Srivatsa S. Bhat >> ---