* Re: [PATCH 3/3] [UDP6]: Counter increment on BH mode [not found] ` <20071203114912.GA4425@ms2.inr.ac.ru> @ 2007-12-03 11:54 ` Herbert Xu 2007-12-03 13:17 ` Herbert Xu 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Herbert Xu @ 2007-12-03 11:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Alexey Kuznetsov Cc: Wang Chen, Gerrit Renker, davem, andi, netdev, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Christoph Lameter, Ingo Molnar On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 02:49:12PM +0300, Alexey Kuznetsov wrote: > On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 10:39:35PM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote: > > So we need to fix this, and whatever the fix is will probably render > > the BH/USER distinction obsolete. > > Hmm, I would think opposite. USER (or generic) is expensive variant, > BH is lite. No? Yes that would certainly be the obvious fix. In other words, just use smp_processor_id instead of the raw version. I suppose the only issue would be that disabling/enabling preemption isn't exactly cost-free and we're going to be doing that for every single increment. Hmm, wasn't someone else talking about a non-atomic version of atomic ops lately (i.e., atomic with respect to the local CPU only)? Perhaps this is the killer app for it :) Thanks, -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] [UDP6]: Counter increment on BH mode 2007-12-03 11:54 ` [PATCH 3/3] [UDP6]: Counter increment on BH mode Herbert Xu @ 2007-12-03 13:17 ` Herbert Xu 2007-12-04 3:50 ` Wang Chen 2007-12-15 13:58 ` Herbert Xu 0 siblings, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Herbert Xu @ 2007-12-03 13:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Alexey Kuznetsov Cc: Wang Chen, Gerrit Renker, davem, andi, netdev, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Christoph Lameter, Ingo Molnar On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 10:54:35PM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote: > > Hmm, wasn't someone else talking about a non-atomic version of atomic > ops lately (i.e., atomic with respect to the local CPU only)? Perhaps > this is the killer app for it :) Never mind, we already have that in local_t and as Alexey correctly points out, USER is still going to be the expensive variant with the preempt_disable (well until BH gets threaded). So how about this patch? Thanks, -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt -- diff --git a/include/net/snmp.h b/include/net/snmp.h index ea206bf..9444b54 100644 --- a/include/net/snmp.h +++ b/include/net/snmp.h @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ #include <linux/cache.h> #include <linux/snmp.h> +#include <linux/smp.h> /* * Mibs are stored in array of unsigned long. @@ -137,7 +138,10 @@ struct linux_mib { #define SNMP_INC_STATS_OFFSET_BH(mib, field, offset) \ (per_cpu_ptr(mib[0], raw_smp_processor_id())->mibs[field + (offset)]++) #define SNMP_INC_STATS_USER(mib, field) \ - (per_cpu_ptr(mib[1], raw_smp_processor_id())->mibs[field]++) + do { \ + per_cpu_ptr(mib[1], get_cpu())->mibs[field]++; \ + put_cpu(); \ + } while (0) #define SNMP_INC_STATS(mib, field) \ (per_cpu_ptr(mib[!in_softirq()], raw_smp_processor_id())->mibs[field]++) #define SNMP_DEC_STATS(mib, field) \ @@ -145,6 +149,9 @@ struct linux_mib { #define SNMP_ADD_STATS_BH(mib, field, addend) \ (per_cpu_ptr(mib[0], raw_smp_processor_id())->mibs[field] += addend) #define SNMP_ADD_STATS_USER(mib, field, addend) \ - (per_cpu_ptr(mib[1], raw_smp_processor_id())->mibs[field] += addend) + do { \ + per_cpu_ptr(mib[1], get_cpu())->mibs[field] += addend; \ + put_cpu(); \ + } while (0) #endif ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] [UDP6]: Counter increment on BH mode 2007-12-03 13:17 ` Herbert Xu @ 2007-12-04 3:50 ` Wang Chen 2007-12-04 3:57 ` Herbert Xu 2007-12-15 13:58 ` Herbert Xu 1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Wang Chen @ 2007-12-04 3:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Herbert Xu Cc: Alexey Kuznetsov, Gerrit Renker, davem, andi, netdev, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Christoph Lameter, Ingo Molnar Herbert Xu said the following on 2007-12-3 21:17: > On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 10:54:35PM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote: > diff --git a/include/net/snmp.h b/include/net/snmp.h > index ea206bf..9444b54 100644 > --- a/include/net/snmp.h > +++ b/include/net/snmp.h > @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ > > #include <linux/cache.h> > #include <linux/snmp.h> > +#include <linux/smp.h> It's no need to include smp.h? -- WCN ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] [UDP6]: Counter increment on BH mode 2007-12-04 3:50 ` Wang Chen @ 2007-12-04 3:57 ` Herbert Xu 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Herbert Xu @ 2007-12-04 3:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Wang Chen Cc: Alexey Kuznetsov, Gerrit Renker, davem, andi, netdev, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Christoph Lameter, Ingo Molnar On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 11:50:55AM +0800, Wang Chen wrote: > > > #include <linux/cache.h> > > #include <linux/snmp.h> > > +#include <linux/smp.h> > > It's no need to include smp.h? We need it for smp_processor_id. Well we needed it before too but there's probably some implicit inclusion which has made it work. It's better to declare these inclusions explicitly as otherwise they may break on less common architectures later. Cheers, -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] [UDP6]: Counter increment on BH mode 2007-12-03 13:17 ` Herbert Xu 2007-12-04 3:50 ` Wang Chen @ 2007-12-15 13:58 ` Herbert Xu 2007-12-15 17:03 ` Eric Dumazet ` (2 more replies) 1 sibling, 3 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Herbert Xu @ 2007-12-15 13:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Alexey Kuznetsov Cc: Wang Chen, Gerrit Renker, davem, andi, netdev, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Christoph Lameter, Ingo Molnar Ob Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 12:17:23AM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote: > > Never mind, we already have that in local_t and as Alexey correctly > points out, USER is still going to be the expensive variant with the > preempt_disable (well until BH gets threaded). So how about this patch? I didn't hear any objections so here is the patch again. [SNMP]: Fix SNMP counters with PREEMPT The SNMP macros use raw_smp_processor_id() in process context which is illegal because the process may be preempted and then migrated to another CPU. This patch makes it use get_cpu/put_cpu to disable preemption. Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> Cheers, -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt -- diff --git a/include/net/snmp.h b/include/net/snmp.h index ea206bf..9444b54 100644 --- a/include/net/snmp.h +++ b/include/net/snmp.h @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ #include <linux/cache.h> #include <linux/snmp.h> +#include <linux/smp.h> /* * Mibs are stored in array of unsigned long. @@ -137,7 +138,10 @@ struct linux_mib { #define SNMP_INC_STATS_OFFSET_BH(mib, field, offset) \ (per_cpu_ptr(mib[0], raw_smp_processor_id())->mibs[field + (offset)]++) #define SNMP_INC_STATS_USER(mib, field) \ - (per_cpu_ptr(mib[1], raw_smp_processor_id())->mibs[field]++) + do { \ + per_cpu_ptr(mib[1], get_cpu())->mibs[field]++; \ + put_cpu(); \ + } while (0) #define SNMP_INC_STATS(mib, field) \ (per_cpu_ptr(mib[!in_softirq()], raw_smp_processor_id())->mibs[field]++) #define SNMP_DEC_STATS(mib, field) \ @@ -145,6 +149,9 @@ struct linux_mib { #define SNMP_ADD_STATS_BH(mib, field, addend) \ (per_cpu_ptr(mib[0], raw_smp_processor_id())->mibs[field] += addend) #define SNMP_ADD_STATS_USER(mib, field, addend) \ - (per_cpu_ptr(mib[1], raw_smp_processor_id())->mibs[field] += addend) + do { \ + per_cpu_ptr(mib[1], get_cpu())->mibs[field] += addend; \ + put_cpu(); \ + } while (0) #endif ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] [UDP6]: Counter increment on BH mode 2007-12-15 13:58 ` Herbert Xu @ 2007-12-15 17:03 ` Eric Dumazet 2007-12-16 2:30 ` [SNMP]: Fix SNMP counters with PREEMPT Herbert Xu 2007-12-15 18:43 ` [PATCH 3/3] [UDP6]: Counter increment on BH mode Ingo Molnar 2007-12-20 12:12 ` David Miller 2 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Eric Dumazet @ 2007-12-15 17:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Herbert Xu Cc: Alexey Kuznetsov, Wang Chen, Gerrit Renker, davem, andi, netdev, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Christoph Lameter, Ingo Molnar Herbert Xu a écrit : > Ob Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 12:17:23AM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote: >> Never mind, we already have that in local_t and as Alexey correctly >> points out, USER is still going to be the expensive variant with the >> preempt_disable (well until BH gets threaded). So how about this patch? > > I didn't hear any objections so here is the patch again. > > [SNMP]: Fix SNMP counters with PREEMPT > > The SNMP macros use raw_smp_processor_id() in process context > which is illegal because the process may be preempted and then > migrated to another CPU. > > This patch makes it use get_cpu/put_cpu to disable preemption. > > Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> > > Cheers, #define SNMP_INC_STATS_USER(mib, field) \ - (per_cpu_ptr(mib[1], raw_smp_processor_id())->mibs[field]++) + do { \ + per_cpu_ptr(mib[1], get_cpu())->mibs[field]++; \ + put_cpu(); \ + } while (0) #define SNMP_INC_STATS(mib, field) \ (per_cpu_ptr(mib[!in_softirq()], raw_smp_processor_id())->mibs[field]++) How come you change SNMP_INC_STATS_USER() but not SNMP_INC_STATS() ? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* [SNMP]: Fix SNMP counters with PREEMPT 2007-12-15 17:03 ` Eric Dumazet @ 2007-12-16 2:30 ` Herbert Xu 2007-12-20 12:13 ` David Miller 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Herbert Xu @ 2007-12-16 2:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eric Dumazet Cc: Alexey Kuznetsov, Wang Chen, Gerrit Renker, davem, andi, netdev, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Christoph Lameter, Ingo Molnar On Sat, Dec 15, 2007 at 06:03:19PM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > How come you change SNMP_INC_STATS_USER() but not SNMP_INC_STATS() ? Heh, my brain must have blocked me from seeing it because it's too hard :) Let's fix it the stupid way first and I'll do a local_t conversion later. [SNMP]: Fix SNMP counters with PREEMPT The SNMP macros use raw_smp_processor_id() in process context which is illegal because the process may be preempted and then migrated to another CPU. This patch makes it use get_cpu/put_cpu to disable preemption. Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> Thanks, -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt -- diff --git a/include/net/snmp.h b/include/net/snmp.h index 9c5793d..fbb6666 100644 --- a/include/net/snmp.h +++ b/include/net/snmp.h @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ #include <linux/cache.h> #include <linux/snmp.h> +#include <linux/smp.h> /* * Mibs are stored in array of unsigned long. @@ -135,14 +136,26 @@ struct linux_mib { #define SNMP_INC_STATS_BH(mib, field) \ (per_cpu_ptr(mib[0], raw_smp_processor_id())->mibs[field]++) #define SNMP_INC_STATS_USER(mib, field) \ - (per_cpu_ptr(mib[1], raw_smp_processor_id())->mibs[field]++) + do { \ + per_cpu_ptr(mib[1], get_cpu())->mibs[field]++; \ + put_cpu(); \ + } while (0) #define SNMP_INC_STATS(mib, field) \ - (per_cpu_ptr(mib[!in_softirq()], raw_smp_processor_id())->mibs[field]++) + do { \ + per_cpu_ptr(mib[!in_softirq()], get_cpu())->mibs[field]++; \ + put_cpu(); \ + } while (0) #define SNMP_DEC_STATS(mib, field) \ - (per_cpu_ptr(mib[!in_softirq()], raw_smp_processor_id())->mibs[field]--) + do { \ + per_cpu_ptr(mib[!in_softirq()], get_cpu())->mibs[field]--; \ + put_cpu(); \ + } while (0) #define SNMP_ADD_STATS_BH(mib, field, addend) \ (per_cpu_ptr(mib[0], raw_smp_processor_id())->mibs[field] += addend) #define SNMP_ADD_STATS_USER(mib, field, addend) \ - (per_cpu_ptr(mib[1], raw_smp_processor_id())->mibs[field] += addend) + do { \ + per_cpu_ptr(mib[1], get_cpu())->mibs[field] += addend; \ + put_cpu(); \ + } while (0) #endif ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [SNMP]: Fix SNMP counters with PREEMPT 2007-12-16 2:30 ` [SNMP]: Fix SNMP counters with PREEMPT Herbert Xu @ 2007-12-20 12:13 ` David Miller 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: David Miller @ 2007-12-20 12:13 UTC (permalink / raw) To: herbert Cc: dada1, kuznet, wangchen, gerrit, andi, netdev, linux-kernel, clameter, mingo From: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 10:30:25 +0800 > On Sat, Dec 15, 2007 at 06:03:19PM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > > > How come you change SNMP_INC_STATS_USER() but not SNMP_INC_STATS() ? > > Heh, my brain must have blocked me from seeing it because it's > too hard :) > > Let's fix it the stupid way first and I'll do a local_t conversion > later. > > [SNMP]: Fix SNMP counters with PREEMPT > > The SNMP macros use raw_smp_processor_id() in process context > which is illegal because the process may be preempted and then > migrated to another CPU. > > This patch makes it use get_cpu/put_cpu to disable preemption. > > Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> I just noticed this and replaced the other SNMP fix patch with this one. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] [UDP6]: Counter increment on BH mode 2007-12-15 13:58 ` Herbert Xu 2007-12-15 17:03 ` Eric Dumazet @ 2007-12-15 18:43 ` Ingo Molnar 2007-12-16 2:36 ` Herbert Xu 2007-12-17 19:40 ` Christoph Lameter 2007-12-20 12:12 ` David Miller 2 siblings, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Ingo Molnar @ 2007-12-15 18:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Herbert Xu Cc: Alexey Kuznetsov, Wang Chen, Gerrit Renker, davem, andi, netdev, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Christoph Lameter * Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> wrote: > Ob Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 12:17:23AM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote: > > > > Never mind, we already have that in local_t and as Alexey correctly > > points out, USER is still going to be the expensive variant with the > > preempt_disable (well until BH gets threaded). So how about this patch? > > I didn't hear any objections so here is the patch again. > > [SNMP]: Fix SNMP counters with PREEMPT > > The SNMP macros use raw_smp_processor_id() in process context which is > illegal because the process may be preempted and then migrated to > another CPU. nit: please use 'invalid' instead of 'illegal'. > This patch makes it use get_cpu/put_cpu to disable preemption. > > Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> > - (per_cpu_ptr(mib[1], raw_smp_processor_id())->mibs[field]++) > + do { \ > + per_cpu_ptr(mib[1], get_cpu())->mibs[field]++; \ > + put_cpu(); \ > + } while (0) > - (per_cpu_ptr(mib[1], raw_smp_processor_id())->mibs[field] += addend) > + do { \ > + per_cpu_ptr(mib[1], get_cpu())->mibs[field] += addend; \ > + put_cpu(); \ > + } while (0) we could perhaps introduce stat_smp_processor_id(), which signals that the CPU id is used for statistical purposes and does not have to be exact? In any case, your patch looks good too. Ingo ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] [UDP6]: Counter increment on BH mode 2007-12-15 18:43 ` [PATCH 3/3] [UDP6]: Counter increment on BH mode Ingo Molnar @ 2007-12-16 2:36 ` Herbert Xu 2007-12-16 8:58 ` Ingo Molnar 2007-12-17 19:42 ` Christoph Lameter 2007-12-17 19:40 ` Christoph Lameter 1 sibling, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Herbert Xu @ 2007-12-16 2:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Alexey Kuznetsov, Wang Chen, Gerrit Renker, davem, andi, netdev, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Christoph Lameter On Sat, Dec 15, 2007 at 07:43:28PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > we could perhaps introduce stat_smp_processor_id(), which signals that > the CPU id is used for statistical purposes and does not have to be > exact? In any case, your patch looks good too. Unfortunately that doesn't work because we can then have two CPUs trying to update the same counter which may corrupt it. However, an optimisation is indeed possible with some work. If we can get the address of the per-cpu counter against some sort of a per-cpu base pointer, e.g., %gs on x86, then we can do incq %gs:(%rax) where %rax would be the offset with %gs as the base. This would obviate the need for the CPU ID and therefore avoid disabling preemption. Hmm, wasn't Christoph working on something like that? Cheers, -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] [UDP6]: Counter increment on BH mode 2007-12-16 2:36 ` Herbert Xu @ 2007-12-16 8:58 ` Ingo Molnar 2007-12-17 19:42 ` Christoph Lameter 1 sibling, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Ingo Molnar @ 2007-12-16 8:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Herbert Xu Cc: Alexey Kuznetsov, Wang Chen, Gerrit Renker, davem, andi, netdev, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Christoph Lameter * Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> wrote: > On Sat, Dec 15, 2007 at 07:43:28PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > we could perhaps introduce stat_smp_processor_id(), which signals that > > the CPU id is used for statistical purposes and does not have to be > > exact? In any case, your patch looks good too. > > Unfortunately that doesn't work because we can then have two CPUs > trying to update the same counter which may corrupt it. ah, indeed. I missed that correctness aspect of your patch. Good catch! Ingo ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] [UDP6]: Counter increment on BH mode 2007-12-16 2:36 ` Herbert Xu 2007-12-16 8:58 ` Ingo Molnar @ 2007-12-17 19:42 ` Christoph Lameter 1 sibling, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Christoph Lameter @ 2007-12-17 19:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Herbert Xu Cc: Ingo Molnar, Alexey Kuznetsov, Wang Chen, Gerrit Renker, davem, andi, netdev, Linux Kernel Mailing List On Sun, 16 Dec 2007, Herbert Xu wrote: > If we can get the address of the per-cpu counter against > some sort of a per-cpu base pointer, e.g., %gs on x86, then > we can do > > incq %gs:(%rax) > > where %rax would be the offset with %gs as the base. This would > obviate the need for the CPU ID and therefore avoid disabling > preemption. > > Hmm, wasn't Christoph working on something like that? Yes that is what the cpu alloc patchset implements. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] [UDP6]: Counter increment on BH mode 2007-12-15 18:43 ` [PATCH 3/3] [UDP6]: Counter increment on BH mode Ingo Molnar 2007-12-16 2:36 ` Herbert Xu @ 2007-12-17 19:40 ` Christoph Lameter 1 sibling, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Christoph Lameter @ 2007-12-17 19:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Herbert Xu, Alexey Kuznetsov, Wang Chen, Gerrit Renker, davem, andi, netdev, Linux Kernel Mailing List The cpu alloc patches also fix this issue one way (disabling preempt) or the other (atomic instruction that does not need disabling of preeemption). ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] [UDP6]: Counter increment on BH mode 2007-12-15 13:58 ` Herbert Xu 2007-12-15 17:03 ` Eric Dumazet 2007-12-15 18:43 ` [PATCH 3/3] [UDP6]: Counter increment on BH mode Ingo Molnar @ 2007-12-20 12:12 ` David Miller 2 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: David Miller @ 2007-12-20 12:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: herbert Cc: kuznet, wangchen, gerrit, andi, netdev, linux-kernel, clameter, mingo From: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 21:58:52 +0800 > [SNMP]: Fix SNMP counters with PREEMPT > > The SNMP macros use raw_smp_processor_id() in process context > which is illegal because the process may be preempted and then > migrated to another CPU. > > This patch makes it use get_cpu/put_cpu to disable preemption. > > Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> Applied to net-2.6.25, thanks. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-12-20 12:17 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <474F7EE8.2040009@cn.fujitsu.com>
[not found] ` <474F8255.5060501@cn.fujitsu.com>
[not found] ` <20071130111949.GB28277@gerrit.erg.abdn.ac.uk>
[not found] ` <20071201015438.GC26895@gondor.apana.org.au>
[not found] ` <4753AE07.1040906@cn.fujitsu.com>
[not found] ` <20071203113935.GA25124@gondor.apana.org.au>
[not found] ` <20071203114912.GA4425@ms2.inr.ac.ru>
2007-12-03 11:54 ` [PATCH 3/3] [UDP6]: Counter increment on BH mode Herbert Xu
2007-12-03 13:17 ` Herbert Xu
2007-12-04 3:50 ` Wang Chen
2007-12-04 3:57 ` Herbert Xu
2007-12-15 13:58 ` Herbert Xu
2007-12-15 17:03 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-12-16 2:30 ` [SNMP]: Fix SNMP counters with PREEMPT Herbert Xu
2007-12-20 12:13 ` David Miller
2007-12-15 18:43 ` [PATCH 3/3] [UDP6]: Counter increment on BH mode Ingo Molnar
2007-12-16 2:36 ` Herbert Xu
2007-12-16 8:58 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-12-17 19:42 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-12-17 19:40 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-12-20 12:12 ` David Miller
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).