On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 12:01:41PM +0530, Vivek Goyal wrote: > On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 06:23:02PM -0700, Hiroshi Shimamoto wrote: > > From: Hiroshi Shimamoto <h-shimamoto at ct.jp.nec.com> > > > > Signed-off-by: Hiroshi Shimamoto <h-shimamoto at ct.jp.nec.com> > > --- > > include/asm-x86/smp_64.h | 2 ++ > > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/include/asm-x86/smp_64.h b/include/asm-x86/smp_64.h > > index 6f0e027..ab612b0 100644 > > --- a/include/asm-x86/smp_64.h > > +++ b/include/asm-x86/smp_64.h > > @@ -76,6 +76,8 @@ extern unsigned __cpuinitdata disabled_cpus; > > > > #endif /* CONFIG_SMP */ > > > > +#define safe_smp_processor_id() smp_processor_id() > > + > > Can you please implement a patch for safe_smp_processor_id() instead of > using smp_processor_id(). safe_smp_processor_id() was introduced to make > sure that we are not dependent on the stack of threads after kernel has > crashed instead read the apic id and convert it to cpu id with other > data structures. This helped in stack overflow case. > > Hardcoding it to smp_processor_id() will give the false impression. > Just now Aneesh pointed that x86_64 using pda for retrieving processor id and not kernel stack. I think it is fine then. Thanks Vivek
