Re: Fw: 2.6.16 crashes when running numastat on p575

[Christoph Lameter]

On Mon, 3 Apr 2006, Nathan Lynch wrote:

> > There are many other for_each_*_cpu loops in the kernel that do not have 
> > any of the instrumentation you suggest. I suggest you come up with a 
> > general solution and then go through all of them and fix this. Please be 
> > aware that many of these loops are performance critical.
> 
> But this one isn't, right?

Right. One could use more expensive processing here.
 
> And I'm afraid there's a misunderstanding here -- only
> for_each_online_cpu (or accessing the cpu online map in general) has
> such restrictions -- for_each_possible_cpu doesn't require any locking
> or preempt tricks since cpu_possible_map must not change after boot.

Correct. We may want to audit the kernel and check that each 
for_each_possible_cpu or for_each_cpu is really correct. Developers 
frequently assume that all processors are up. There may be some 
complicated interactions with cpusets. Adding Paul to this.

However, note that I am not interested hotplug functionality. It is going 
to be a difficult task to make the kernel shutdown processors correctly. I 
can give you feedback but I am not going to do this work.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/