* Andy Lutomirski <l...@amacapital.net> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 6:48 AM, Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk>
> wrote:
> > Although
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/stop_machine.h b/include/linux/stop_machine.h
> > index d2abbdb..ff4f029 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/stop_machine.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/stop_machine.h
> > @@ -97,7 +97,7 @@ static inline int try_stop_cpus(const struct cpumask
> > *cpumask,
> > * grabbing every spinlock (and more). So the "read" side to such a
> > * lock is anything which disables preemption.
> > */
> > -#if defined(CONFIG_STOP_MACHINE) && defined(CONFIG_SMP)
> > +#if defined(CONFIG_SMP) || defined(CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU)
>
> [...]
>
> This seems much better. Having a set of stop_machine functions around
> that don't work depending on config seems dangerous.
Agreed.
Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org>
Thanks,
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
