On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 7:50 AM Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Guo Ren, > > On Sat, Mar 12, 2022 at 7:56 AM <guoren@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > From: Guo Ren <guoren@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > These patch_text implementations are using stop_machine_cpuslocked > > infrastructure with atomic cpu_count. The origin idea is that when > > The original > > > the master CPU patch_text, others should wait for it. But current > > implementation is using the first CPU as master, which couldn't > > guarantee continue CPUs are waiting. This patch changes the last > > guarantee that remaining CPUs are waiting. > > > CPU as the master to solve the potaintial risk. > > potential > > > > > Signed-off-by: Guo Ren <guoren@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Guo Ren <guoren@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Will Deacon <will@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx> > > Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Chris Zankel <chris@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@xxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> > > --- > > arch/arm64/kernel/patching.c | 4 ++-- > > arch/csky/kernel/probes/kprobes.c | 2 +- > > arch/riscv/kernel/patch.c | 2 +- > > arch/xtensa/kernel/jump_label.c | 2 +- > > 4 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > Reviewed-by: Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@xxxxxxxxx> > > I'm curious, is there a specific issue that prompted this patch? No, theoretical risk. > > -- > Thanks. > -- Max -- Best Regards Guo Ren ML: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-csky/
