On Fri, 8 Feb 2008, Venki Pallipadi wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 11:28:48AM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> >
> > > - set_cpus_allowed(current, tmp);
> > > + smp_mb();
> > > + /* kick all the CPUs so that they exit out of pm_idle */
> > > + smp_call_function(do_nothing, NULL, 0, 0);
> >
> > I
On Fri, 8 Feb 2008, Venki Pallipadi wrote:
On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 11:28:48AM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
- set_cpus_allowed(current, tmp);
+ smp_mb();
+ /* kick all the CPUs so that they exit out of pm_idle */
+ smp_call_function(do_nothing, NULL, 0, 0);
I think the last
On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 09:24:30AM -0800, Venki Pallipadi wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 11:28:48AM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> >
> > > - set_cpus_allowed(current, tmp);
> > > + smp_mb();
> > > + /* kick all the CPUs so that they exit out of pm_idle */
> > > + smp_call_function(do_nothing, NULL,
On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 11:28:48AM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> > - set_cpus_allowed(current, tmp);
> > + smp_mb();
> > + /* kick all the CPUs so that they exit out of pm_idle */
> > + smp_call_function(do_nothing, NULL, 0, 0);
>
> I think the last argument (wait) needs to be 1 to make
> - set_cpus_allowed(current, tmp);
> + smp_mb();
> + /* kick all the CPUs so that they exit out of pm_idle */
> + smp_call_function(do_nothing, NULL, 0, 0);
I think the last argument (wait) needs to be 1 to make sure it is
synchronous (for 32/64) Otherwise the patch looks
- set_cpus_allowed(current, tmp);
+ smp_mb();
+ /* kick all the CPUs so that they exit out of pm_idle */
+ smp_call_function(do_nothing, NULL, 0, 0);
I think the last argument (wait) needs to be 1 to make sure it is
synchronous (for 32/64) Otherwise the patch looks great.
On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 09:24:30AM -0800, Venki Pallipadi wrote:
On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 11:28:48AM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
- set_cpus_allowed(current, tmp);
+ smp_mb();
+ /* kick all the CPUs so that they exit out of pm_idle */
+ smp_call_function(do_nothing, NULL, 0, 0);
I
On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 11:28:48AM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
- set_cpus_allowed(current, tmp);
+ smp_mb();
+ /* kick all the CPUs so that they exit out of pm_idle */
+ smp_call_function(do_nothing, NULL, 0, 0);
I think the last argument (wait) needs to be 1 to make sure it is
Earlier commit 40d6a146629b98d8e322b6f9332b182c7cbff3df
added smp_call_function in cpu_idle_wait() to kick cpus that are in tickless
idle. Looking at cpu_idle_wait code at that time, code seemed to be
over-engineered for a case which is rarely used (while changing idle handler).
Below is a
Earlier commit 40d6a146629b98d8e322b6f9332b182c7cbff3df
added smp_call_function in cpu_idle_wait() to kick cpus that are in tickless
idle. Looking at cpu_idle_wait code at that time, code seemed to be
over-engineered for a case which is rarely used (while changing idle handler).
Below is a
10 matches
Mail list logo