Re: [PULL] x86 cpumask work
From: Rusty Russell
Date: Fri Mar 13 2009 - 00:34:28 EST
On Friday 13 March 2009 13:50:15 Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Friday 13 March 2009 11:27:43 Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > >
> > > * Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > Missing a core patch (it even got a compile warning with that
> > > > config).
> > > So it's manual work and sometimes i notice them amongst a
> > > boatload of other warnings, sometimes i dont.
> >
> > Me too :( I thought you were starting a de-warning tree? I'd
> > be happy to send you patches (particularly, exporting
> > deprecated symbols should not give a warning!).
>
> Yeah - i have a de-warning tree, but it's not yet fully up and
> running for -tip qa automation.
>
> > > > But there's something else wrong. Firing up my 64-bit
> > > > test box now.
> > >
> > > Great - so you can reproduce. Thanks,
> >
> > Yep, and I'm running some stress tests as well now.
> >
> > Perhaps throw away that tree, and I'll feed you a new one (the
> > core patch needs to go at the front), but I can work either
> > way.
>
> Ok, i dropped it back to d95c357.
>
> Suggestion for future workflow: we wouldnt have these somewhat
> stressful (and stressful to you mostly!), large hickups and
> history-less trees if you sent stuff more gradually and not so
> close to the merge window. You exposed some of your changes to
> linux-next but that's not nearly enough testing in practice for
> x86-affecting patches.
Yes, I wanted to complete the patchset to make sure I wasn't going to hit
some subtle problem.
OK, please check the first patch (it's a new addition, I *think* using
the topology_* macros is right here), and the other change is:
Here's the other change: it's a little ugly (AFAICT boot_cpu_data isn't
even *used* on 64 bit, so a cleanup may be in order):
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
@@ -329,6 +329,23 @@ notrace static void __cpuinit start_seco
cpu_idle();
}
+#ifdef CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK
+/* In this case, llc_shared_map is a pointer to a cpumask. */
+static inline void copy_cpuinfo_x86(struct cpuinfo_x86 *dst,
+ const struct cpuinfo_x86 *src)
+{
+ struct cpumask *llc = dst->llc_shared_map;
+ *dst = *src;
+ dst->llc_shared_map = llc;
+}
+#else
+static inline void copy_cpuinfo_x86(struct cpuinfo_x86 *dst,
+ const struct cpuinfo_x86 *src)
+{
+ *dst = *src;
+}
+#endif /* CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK */
+
/*
* The bootstrap kernel entry code has set these up. Save them for
* a given CPU
@@ -338,7 +355,7 @@ void __cpuinit smp_store_cpu_info(int id
{
struct cpuinfo_x86 *c = &cpu_data(id);
- *c = boot_cpu_data;
+ copy_cpuinfo_x86(c, &boot_cpu_data);
c->cpu_index = id;
if (id != 0)
identify_secondary_cpu(c);
BTW, these didn't go thru linux-next: your testing is better and your
tree is too different or me to ask Stephen to merge.
Thanks!
Rusty.
The following changes since commit d95c3578120e5bc4784069439f00ccb1b5f87717:
Ingo Molnar (1):
Merge branch 'x86/core' into cpus4096
are available in the git repository at:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rusty/linux-2.6-x86.git cpus4096
Rusty Russell (22):
cpumask: use topology_core_cpumask/topology_thread_cpumask instead of cpu_core_map/cpu_sibling_map
cpumask: replace node_to_cpumask with cpumask_of_node.
cpumask: remove dangerous CPU_MASK_ALL_PTR, &CPU_MASK_ALL.: x86
cpumask: remove the now-obsoleted pcibus_to_cpumask(): x86
cpumask: remove cpu_coregroup_map: x86
cpumask: remove obsolete topology_core_siblings and topology_thread_siblings: x86
cpumask: convert c1e_mask in arch/x86/kernel/process.c to cpumask_var_t.
cpumask: convert arch/x86/kernel/nmi.c's backtrace_mask to a cpumask_var_t
cpumask: x86: convert cpu_sibling_map/cpu_core_map to cpumask_var_t
cpumask: convert arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce_64.c
x86: arch_send_call_function_ipi_mask
cpumask: remove x86's node_to_cpumask now everyone uses cpumask_of_node
x86: unify 32 and 64-bit node_to_cpumask_map
cpumask: convert node_to_cpumask_map[] to cpumask_var_t
cpumask: convert struct cpuinfo_x86's llc_shared_map to cpumask_var_t
x86: unify cpu_callin_mask/cpu_callout_mask/cpu_initialized_mask/cpu_sibling_setup_mask
cpumask: use new cpumask functions throughout x86
cpumask: clean up summit's send_IPI functions
cpumask: make Xen use the new operators.
cpumask: remove cpumask_t assignment from vector_allocation_domain()
cpumask: use cpumask_var_t in uv_flush_tlb_others.
cpumask: remove x86 cpumask_t uses.
arch/x86/include/asm/cpumask.h | 18 -----
arch/x86/include/asm/pci.h | 5 -
arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h | 2 +-
arch/x86/include/asm/smp.h | 13 ++--
arch/x86/include/asm/topology.h | 89 +++++-----------------
arch/x86/kernel/apic/bigsmp_32.c | 16 ++--
arch/x86/kernel/apic/es7000_32.c | 17 ++--
arch/x86/kernel/apic/nmi.c | 11 ++-
arch/x86/kernel/apic/numaq_32.c | 11 ++-
arch/x86/kernel/apic/probe_32.c | 3 +-
arch/x86/kernel/apic/summit_32.c | 21 ++---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c | 12 ---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/p4-clockmod.c | 2 +-
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c | 13 ++-
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/speedstep-ich.c | 2 +-
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce_64.c | 10 ++-
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce_amd_64.c | 6 +-
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce_intel_64.c | 2 +-
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/proc.c | 6 +-
arch/x86/kernel/process.c | 12 ++-
arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c | 70 ++++++++++-------
arch/x86/kernel/tlb_uv.c | 9 ++-
arch/x86/mm/Makefile | 2 +-
arch/x86/mm/numa.c | 67 ++++++++++++++++
arch/x86/mm/numa_64.c | 111 ++-------------------------
arch/x86/oprofile/op_model_p4.c | 2 +-
arch/x86/xen/smp.c | 6 +-
block/blk.h | 2 +-
drivers/base/node.c | 2 +-
drivers/pci/pci-driver.c | 3 +-
drivers/xen/cpu_hotplug.c | 4 +-
include/linux/topology.h | 6 +-
kernel/sched.c | 8 +-
mm/page_alloc.c | 6 +-
mm/quicklist.c | 2 +-
mm/slab.c | 2 +-
mm/vmscan.c | 6 +-
net/sunrpc/svc.c | 3 +-
38 files changed, 246 insertions(+), 336 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 arch/x86/mm/numa.c
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/