search for: cpu_online

...t sscs = { > + .work = __WORK_INITIALIZER(sscs.work, smp_call_on_cpu_callback), > + .done = COMPLETION_INITIALIZER_ONSTACK(sscs.done), > + .func = func, > + .data = par, > + .cpu = pin ? cpu : -1, > + }; > + > + if (cpu >= nr_cpu_ids) You might want to also include cpu_online(). if (cpu >= nr_cpu_ids || !cpu_online(cpu)) > + return -ENXIO; Seeing how its fairly hard to schedule work on a cpu that's not actually there. > + > + queue_work_on(cpu, system_wq, &sscs.work); > + wait_for_completion(&sscs.done); > + > + return sscs.ret; &gt...

...t sscs = { > + .work = __WORK_INITIALIZER(sscs.work, smp_call_on_cpu_callback), > + .done = COMPLETION_INITIALIZER_ONSTACK(sscs.done), > + .func = func, > + .data = par, > + .cpu = pin ? cpu : -1, > + }; > + > + if (cpu >= nr_cpu_ids) You might want to also include cpu_online(). if (cpu >= nr_cpu_ids || !cpu_online(cpu)) > + return -ENXIO; Seeing how its fairly hard to schedule work on a cpu that's not actually there. > + > + queue_work_on(cpu, system_wq, &sscs.work); > + wait_for_completion(&sscs.done); > + > + return sscs.ret; &gt...

...6d (Jens Axboe 2017-08-01 09:28:24 -0600 1142) */ 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1143) WARN_ON(!cpumask_test_cpu(raw_smp_processor_id(), hctx->cpumask) && 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1144) cpu_online(hctx->next_cpu)); 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1145) b7a71e66d (Jens Axboe 2017-08-01 09:28:24 -0600 1146) /* Is this a known issue? Christian

...6d (Jens Axboe 2017-08-01 09:28:24 -0600 1142) */ 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1143) WARN_ON(!cpumask_test_cpu(raw_smp_processor_id(), hctx->cpumask) && 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1144) cpu_online(hctx->next_cpu)); 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1145) b7a71e66d (Jens Axboe 2017-08-01 09:28:24 -0600 1146) /* Is this a known issue? Christian

...LEN) #define GOOD_COPY_LEN 128 @@ -1041,6 +1044,26 @@ static void virtnet_set_affinity(struct virtnet_info *vi, bool set) vi->affinity_hint_set = false; } +static int virtnet_cpu_callback(struct notifier_block *nfb, + unsigned long action, void *hcpu) +{ + switch(action) { + case CPU_ONLINE: + case CPU_ONLINE_FROZEN: + case CPU_DEAD: + case CPU_DEAD_FROZEN: + cpu_hotplug = true; + break; + default: + break; + } + return NOTIFY_OK; +} + +static struct notifier_block virtnet_cpu_notifier = { + .notifier_call = virtnet_cpu_callback, +}; + static void virtnet_get_ringparam(struct net_...

...LEN) #define GOOD_COPY_LEN 128 @@ -1041,6 +1044,26 @@ static void virtnet_set_affinity(struct virtnet_info *vi, bool set) vi->affinity_hint_set = false; } +static int virtnet_cpu_callback(struct notifier_block *nfb, + unsigned long action, void *hcpu) +{ + switch(action) { + case CPU_ONLINE: + case CPU_ONLINE_FROZEN: + case CPU_DEAD: + case CPU_DEAD_FROZEN: + cpu_hotplug = true; + break; + default: + break; + } + return NOTIFY_OK; +} + +static struct notifier_block virtnet_cpu_notifier = { + .notifier_call = virtnet_cpu_callback, +}; + static void virtnet_get_ringparam(struct net_...

...2017-08-01 09:28:24 -0600 1142) */ >> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1143) WARN_ON(!cpumask_test_cpu(raw_smp_processor_id(), hctx->cpumask) && >> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1144) cpu_online(hctx->next_cpu)); >> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1145) >> b7a71e66d (Jens Axboe 2017-08-01 09:28:24 -0600 1146) /* > > Did you really try to figure out when the code that reported the warning > was introduced? I think th...

...2017-08-01 09:28:24 -0600 1142) */ >> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1143) WARN_ON(!cpumask_test_cpu(raw_smp_processor_id(), hctx->cpumask) && >> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1144) cpu_online(hctx->next_cpu)); >> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1145) >> b7a71e66d (Jens Axboe 2017-08-01 09:28:24 -0600 1146) /* > > Did you really try to figure out when the code that reported the warning > was introduced? I think th...

...t.c @@ -1116,6 +1116,11 @@ static int virtnet_cpu_callback(struct notifier_block *nfb, { struct virtnet_info *vi = container_of(nfb, struct virtnet_info, nb); + mutex_lock(&vi->config_lock); + + if (!vi->config_enable) + goto done; + switch(action & ~CPU_TASKS_FROZEN) { case CPU_ONLINE: case CPU_DOWN_FAILED: @@ -1128,6 +1133,9 @@ static int virtnet_cpu_callback(struct notifier_block *nfb, default: break; } + +done: + mutex_unlock(&vi->config_lock); return NOTIFY_OK; } -- 1.8.1.2

...t.c @@ -1116,6 +1116,11 @@ static int virtnet_cpu_callback(struct notifier_block *nfb, { struct virtnet_info *vi = container_of(nfb, struct virtnet_info, nb); + mutex_lock(&vi->config_lock); + + if (!vi->config_enable) + goto done; + switch(action & ~CPU_TASKS_FROZEN) { case CPU_ONLINE: case CPU_DOWN_FAILED: @@ -1128,6 +1133,9 @@ static int virtnet_cpu_callback(struct notifier_block *nfb, default: break; } + +done: + mutex_unlock(&vi->config_lock); return NOTIFY_OK; } -- 1.8.1.2

...t.c @@ -1118,11 +1118,6 @@ static int virtnet_cpu_callback(struct notifier_block *nfb, { struct virtnet_info *vi = container_of(nfb, struct virtnet_info, nb); - mutex_lock(&vi->config_lock); - - if (!vi->config_enable) - goto done; - switch(action & ~CPU_TASKS_FROZEN) { case CPU_ONLINE: case CPU_DOWN_FAILED: @@ -1136,8 +1131,6 @@ static int virtnet_cpu_callback(struct notifier_block *nfb, break; } -done: - mutex_unlock(&vi->config_lock); return NOTIFY_OK; } @@ -1699,6 +1692,8 @@ static int virtnet_freeze(struct virtio_device *vdev) struct virtnet_info *vi =...

...t.c @@ -1118,11 +1118,6 @@ static int virtnet_cpu_callback(struct notifier_block *nfb, { struct virtnet_info *vi = container_of(nfb, struct virtnet_info, nb); - mutex_lock(&vi->config_lock); - - if (!vi->config_enable) - goto done; - switch(action & ~CPU_TASKS_FROZEN) { case CPU_ONLINE: case CPU_DOWN_FAILED: @@ -1136,8 +1131,6 @@ static int virtnet_cpu_callback(struct notifier_block *nfb, break; } -done: - mutex_unlock(&vi->config_lock); return NOTIFY_OK; } @@ -1699,6 +1692,8 @@ static int virtnet_freeze(struct virtio_device *vdev) struct virtnet_info *vi =...

...-08-01 09:28:24 -0600 1142) */ >>>> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1143) WARN_ON(!cpumask_test_cpu(raw_smp_processor_id(), hctx->cpumask) && >>>> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1144) cpu_online(hctx->next_cpu)); >>>> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1145) >>>> b7a71e66d (Jens Axboe 2017-08-01 09:28:24 -0600 1146) /* >>> >>> Did you really try to figure out when the code that reported the warning...

...-08-01 09:28:24 -0600 1142) */ >>>> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1143) WARN_ON(!cpumask_test_cpu(raw_smp_processor_id(), hctx->cpumask) && >>>> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1144) cpu_online(hctx->next_cpu)); >>>> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1145) >>>> b7a71e66d (Jens Axboe 2017-08-01 09:28:24 -0600 1146) /* >>> >>> Did you really try to figure out when the code that reported the warning...

...-0600 1142) */ >>>>>> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1143) WARN_ON(!cpumask_test_cpu(raw_smp_processor_id(), hctx->cpumask) && >>>>>> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1144) cpu_online(hctx->next_cpu)); >>>>>> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1145) >>>>>> b7a71e66d (Jens Axboe 2017-08-01 09:28:24 -0600 1146) /* >>>>> >>>>> Did you really try to figure out when the...

...-0600 1142) */ >>>>>> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1143) WARN_ON(!cpumask_test_cpu(raw_smp_processor_id(), hctx->cpumask) && >>>>>> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1144) cpu_online(hctx->next_cpu)); >>>>>> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1145) >>>>>> b7a71e66d (Jens Axboe 2017-08-01 09:28:24 -0600 1146) /* >>>>> >>>>> Did you really try to figure out when the...

.. snip.. >> Both of them (acpi-cpufreq.c and powernow-k8.c) have a symbol >> dependency on drivers/acpi/processor.c > > But them being ''m'' or ''y'' shouldn''t matter in the end. I thought you were saying it matters - as it should be done around the same time as cpufreq drivers were loaded? .. snip.. >> For a), this would mean some

...xboe 2017-08-01 09:28:24 -0600 1142) */ > 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1143) WARN_ON(!cpumask_test_cpu(raw_smp_processor_id(), hctx->cpumask) && > 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1144) cpu_online(hctx->next_cpu)); > 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1145) > b7a71e66d (Jens Axboe 2017-08-01 09:28:24 -0600 1146) /* Did you really try to figure out when the code that reported the warning was introduced? I think that warning was introduc...

...2017-08-01 09:28:24 -0600 1142) */ >>> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1143) WARN_ON(!cpumask_test_cpu(raw_smp_processor_id(), hctx->cpumask) && >>> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1144) cpu_online(hctx->next_cpu)); >>> 6a83e74d2 (Bart Van Assche 2016-11-02 10:09:51 -0600 1145) >>> b7a71e66d (Jens Axboe 2017-08-01 09:28:24 -0600 1146) /* >> >> Did you really try to figure out when the code that reported the warning >> was int...

...unused) { int cpu; cpu_init(); touch_softlockup_watchdog(); - preempt_disable(); xen_enable_sysenter(); xen_enable_syscall(); @@ -75,25 +74,11 @@ static void __cpuinit cpu_bringup(void) set_cpu_sibling_map(cpu); xen_setup_cpu_clockevents(); - - notify_cpu_starting(cpu); - - set_cpu_online(cpu, true); - - this_cpu_write(cpu_state, CPU_ONLINE); - - wmb(); - - /* We can take interrupts now: we're officially "up". */ - local_irq_enable(); - - wmb(); /* make sure everything is out */ } static void __cpuinit cpu_bringup_and_idle(void) { - cpu_bringup(); - cpu_idle();...