On Fri, 2011-05-20 at 08:07 +0200, Daniel Hellstrom wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> >On Thu, 2011-05-19 at 15:37 +0200, Daniel Hellstrom wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>diff --git a/arch/sparc/kernel/smp_32.c b/arch/sparc/kernel/smp_32.c
> >>index 41102c5..d5b3958 100644
> >>--- a/arch/sparc/kernel/smp_32.c
> >>+++ b/arch/sparc/kernel/smp_32.c
> >>@@ -156,11 +156,11 @@ void arch_send_call_function_ipi_mask(const struct
> >>cpumask *mask)
> >>
> >> void smp_resched_interrupt(void)
> >> {
> >>+ irq_enter();
> >>+ scheduler_ipi();
> >> local_cpu_data().irq_resched_count++;
> >>- /*
> >>- * do nothing, since it all was about calling re-schedule
> >>- * routine called by interrupt return code.
> >>- */
> >>+ irq_exit();
> >>+ /* re-schedule routine called by interrupt return code. */
> >> }
> >>
> >>
> >
> >That doesn't look like an IPI, that looks like its calls the function on
> >the local cpu, which is completely pointless.
> >
> >
> The above function is one of the IPI interrupt handlers.
>
> The smp_send_reschedule() is called by the generic code, it is
> responsible for sending an IRQ to the target CPU, that CPU comes into
> smp_resched_interrupt above from the IRQ trap handler. So yes, the
> scheduler_ipi() is called on the local CPU, but on the CPU taking the
> IPI not the CPU sending the IPI.
Ah, clearly I cannot read well, I actually thought that was
smp_send_reschedule(). OK, if sparc32 is now actually sending IPIs and
the above is the handler, then you're completely right, sorry for the
confusion.
Also, since sparc32 now grew this IPI, you can remove:
+++ b/init/Kconfig
@@ -827,6 +827,11 @@ config SCHED_AUTOGROUP
desktop applications. Task group autogeneration is currently based
upon task session.
+config SCHED_TTWU_QUEUE
+ bool
+ depends on !SPARC32
+ default y
+
config MM_OWNER
bool
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
