Re: smp_processor_id warning in megasas driver on 3.19.3

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 11:17 AM, James Bottomley
<James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-04-08 at 10:59 -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> This is a regression somewhere between 3.15 and 3.19.3.  Let me know
>> if more diagnostics would be helpful.
>
> It's not a regression.  Likely someone turned on additional warnings.
> So the problem is that the warning is incorrect: the use of
> smp_processor_id() isn't pre-empt unsafe.  The driver is using it as a
> hint as to which queue it should be using, so it doesn't matter if
> pre-empt schedules the driver thread away from that CPU.

The warning goes a long way back.  For example, this change from 2005
seems to have refactored it:

commit 39c715b71740c4a78ba4769fb54826929bac03cb
Author: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>
Date:   Tue Jun 21 17:14:34 2005 -0700

    [PATCH] smp_processor_id() cleanup


>
> I presume the warning is because whoever added it thinks that you should
> be using the get/put cpu API, which would be wholly inappropriate here
> because we don't want to bind the thread, we just want a hint about the
> queue.

Would raw_smp_processor_id be a good compromise?  I'm testing a patch
right now and, if it works, I can send it and cc stable.

--Andy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [SCSI Target Devel]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Linux IIO]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]
  Powered by Linux