Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Refcount Based Cpu-Hotplug Revisit.

On Wed, 17 Oct 2007, Dipankar Sarma wrote:
> 
> Unless I am reading the patch wrongly, it seems cpu_hotplug_begin() is called 
> while holding the cpu_add_remove_lock mutex. So, another CPU cannot come in
> and do the same until _cpu_down() is over.

Ahh, in that case I take back that objection, although maybe a comment 
about the required nesting within the other mutex is in order? Or maybe 
it's there and I just missed it (blush).

			Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Refcount Based Cpu-Hotplug Revisit.
    • From: Gautham R Shenoy <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [RFC PATCH 0/4] Refcount Based Cpu-Hotplug Revisit.
    • From: Gautham R Shenoy <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Refcount Based Cpu-Hotplug Revisit.
    • From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Refcount Based Cpu-Hotplug Revisit.
    • From: Dipankar Sarma <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [patch] sched: fix improper load balance across sched domain
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 2/3] [kexec-tools] Pass vmcoreinfo's address and size
• Previous by thread: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Refcount Based Cpu-Hotplug Revisit.
• Next by thread: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Refcount Based Cpu-Hotplug Revisit.
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]