From: Vijay Kumar <vijay.ac.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 21:44:24 -0500 > I had same thoughts initially but I had to go with this approach as > scheduler_ipi is wrapped with irq_enter() and irq_exit(). Whereas POKE > resumes the cpu in process context. > > Comments in scheduler_ipi(): > > * Not all reschedule IPI handlers call irq_enter/irq_exit, since > * traditionally all their work was done from the interrupt return > * path. Now that we actually do some work, we need to make sure > * we do call them. > * > * Some archs already do call them, luckily irq_enter/exit nest > * properly. > * > * Arguably we should visit all archs and update all handlers, > * however a fair share of IPIs are still resched only so this would > * somewhat pessimize the simple resched case. > */ > irq_enter(); > I still think we should be able to fake the state such that this direct schedule_ipi() call will work. I could be wrong :) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
