On 27/08/14 10:30, [email protected] wrote:
From: Byungchul Park <[email protected]>
This patch ensures that the cpu being offlined is not present in the affinity
mask.
I agree that this patch fixes the issue reported in [1] without
disabling forced set affinity mask. However Thomas responded yesterday
asking to disable it [2] on the original thread for ARM. I have
responded on the thread and waiting for feedback from rmk and tglx. I
would prefer to wait and align with ARM code if possible.
Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park <[email protected]>
---
arch/arm64/kernel/irq.c | 9 +++++++++
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/irq.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/irq.c
index 473e5db..0c7b79e 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/irq.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/irq.c
@@ -87,6 +87,7 @@ static bool migrate_one_irq(struct irq_desc *desc)
{
struct irq_data *d = irq_desc_get_irq_data(desc);
const struct cpumask *affinity = d->affinity;
+ struct cpumask tmp_affinity;
struct irq_chip *c;
bool ret = false;
@@ -100,6 +101,14 @@ static bool migrate_one_irq(struct irq_desc *desc)
if (cpumask_any_and(affinity, cpu_online_mask) >= nr_cpu_ids) {
affinity = cpu_online_mask;
ret = true;
+ } else {
+ /*
+ * when using forced irq_set_affinity we must ensure that the
cpu
+ * being offlined is not present in the affinity mask, it may be
+ * selected as the target CPU otherwise
+ */
+ cpumask_and(&tmp_affinity, affinity, cpu_online_mask);
In case we decide to retain forced set affinity, you can probably squash
this cpumask_and with the above cpumask_any_and.
+ affinity = &tmp_affinity;
}
c = irq_data_get_irq_chip(d);
Regards,
Sudeep
[1]
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-June/266785.html
[2]
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-August/281548.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
