Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S936202AbWK3Lnm (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Nov 2006 06:43:42 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S936204AbWK3Lnm (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Nov 2006 06:43:42 -0500 Received: from ausmtp04.au.ibm.com ([202.81.18.152]:58046 "EHLO ausmtp04.au.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S936202AbWK3Lnl (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Nov 2006 06:43:41 -0500 Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 17:13:46 +0530 From: Gautham R Shenoy To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Gautham R Shenoy , akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@osdl.org, davej@redhat.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com, vatsa@in.ibm.com Subject: Re: CPUFREQ-CPUHOTPLUG: Possible circular locking dependency Message-ID: <20061130114346.GC23354@in.ibm.com> Reply-To: ego@in.ibm.com References: <20061129152404.GA7082@in.ibm.com> <20061130083144.GC29609@elte.hu> <20061130102410.GB23354@in.ibm.com> <20061130110315.GA30460@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20061130110315.GA30460@elte.hu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.10i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2281 Lines: 70 On Thu, Nov 30, 2006 at 12:03:15PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Gautham R Shenoy wrote: > > > a) cpufreq maintain's it's own cpumask in the variable > > policy->affected_cpus and says : If a frequency change is issued to > > any one of the cpu's in the affected_cpus mask, you change frequency > > on all cpus in the mask. So this needs to be consistent with > > cpu_online map and hence cpu hotplug aware. Furthermore, we don't want > > cpus in this mask to go down when we are trying to change frequencies > > on them. The function which drives the frequency change in > > cpufreq-core is cpufreq_driver_target and it needs cpu-hotplug > > protection. > > couldnt this complexity be radically simplified by having new kernel > infrastructure that does something like: > > " 'gather' all CPUs mentioned in via scheduling a separate > helper-kthread on every CPU that specifies, disable all > interrupts, and execute function once all CPUs have been > 'gathered' - and release all CPUs once has executed on each of > them." > > ? This is what is currently being done by cpufreq: a) get_some_cpu_hotplug_protection() [use either some global mechanism or a persubsystem mutex] b) actual_freq_change_driver_function(mask) /* You can check out cpufreq_p4_target() in * arch/i386/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/p4-clockmod.c */ { for_each_cpu_mask(i, mask) { cpumask_t this_cpu = cpumask_of_cpu(i); set_cpus_allowed(current, this_cpu); function_to_change_frequency(); } } c) release_whatever_cpu_hotplug_protection() > > This would be done totally serialized and while holding the hotplug > lock, so no CPU could go away or arrive while this operation is going > on. > Isn't the above same as what you are suggesting? Or have I missed out anything? > Ingo regards gautham. -- Gautham R Shenoy Linux Technology Center IBM India. "Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain, because Freedom is priceless!" - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/