Commit 6a190051 authored by Oleg Nesterov's avatar Oleg Nesterov Committed by Ingo Molnar

stop_machine: Don't disable preemption in stop_two_cpus()

Now that stop_two_cpus() path does not check cpu_active() we can remove
preempt_disable(), it was only needed to ensure that stop_machine() can
not be called after we observe cpu_active() == T and before we queue the
new work.

Also, turn the pointless and confusing ->executed check into WARN_ON().
We know that both works must be executed, otherwise we have a bug. And
in fact I think that done->executed should die, see the next changes.
Signed-off-by: default avatarOleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Acked-by: default avatarTejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Milos Vyletel <milos@redhat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20151115193314.GA8249@redhat.comSigned-off-by: default avatarIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
parent 64038f29
......@@ -258,7 +258,6 @@ int stop_two_cpus(unsigned int cpu1, unsigned int cpu2, cpu_stop_fn_t fn, void *
struct cpu_stop_work work1, work2;
struct multi_stop_data msdata;
preempt_disable();
msdata = (struct multi_stop_data){
.fn = fn,
.data = arg,
......@@ -277,16 +276,12 @@ int stop_two_cpus(unsigned int cpu1, unsigned int cpu2, cpu_stop_fn_t fn, void *
if (cpu1 > cpu2)
swap(cpu1, cpu2);
if (cpu_stop_queue_two_works(cpu1, &work1, cpu2, &work2)) {
preempt_enable();
if (cpu_stop_queue_two_works(cpu1, &work1, cpu2, &work2))
return -ENOENT;
}
preempt_enable();
wait_for_completion(&done.completion);
return done.executed ? done.ret : -ENOENT;
WARN_ON(!done.executed);
return done.ret;
}
/**
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment