On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 01:41:13PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 08, 2022 at 04:27:37PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > --- a/kernel/time/tick-broadcast.c
> > +++ b/kernel/time/tick-broadcast.c
> > @@ -622,9 +622,13 @@ struct cpumask *tick_get_broadcast_onesh
> > * to avoid a deep idle transition as we are about to get the
> > * broadcast IPI right away.
> > */
> > -int tick_check_broadcast_expired(void)
> > +noinstr int tick_check_broadcast_expired(void)
> > {
> > +#ifdef _ASM_GENERIC_BITOPS_INSTRUMENTED_NON_ATOMIC_H
> > + return arch_test_bit(smp_processor_id(), cpumask_bits(tick_broadcast_force_mask));
> > +#else
> > return cpumask_test_cpu(smp_processor_id(), tick_broadcast_force_mask);
> > +#endif
> > }
>
> This is somewhat not-ideal. :/
I'll say.
> Could we unconditionally do the arch_test_bit() variant, with a comment, or
> does that not exist in some cases?
Loads of build errors ensued, which is how I ended up with this mess ...
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
