On Wed, 17 Oct 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 01:17:18PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Wed, 17 Oct 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 17, 2018 at 09:54:38AM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> > > > > * We should perform an IPI and flush all tlbs,
> > > > > * but that can deadlock->flush only current cpu:
> > > > > */
> > > > > + preempt_disable();
> > > > > __flush_tlb_all();
> > > > > + preempt_enable();
> > > >
> > > > Can it make any sense to flush the tlb with preemption enabled?
> > > > Surely preemption must be disabled over something else as well?
> > >
> > > This code is fishy anyway, for only doing that local invalidate.
> > >
> > > Ideally we'd never ever merge anything that only does local invalidates,
> > > on a global address space, that's just broken.
> >
> > A little bit late to lament about that.
>
> For this, yes :/ But for future stuff we should really not allow such
> things anymore.
>
> > So should we just replace it with cpa_flush_all() ?
>
> The comment there suggests that will deadlock, supposedly because the
> kernel_map_page() call can happen with IRQs disabled or such.
>
> I've not deeply looked at this.
Bah, right. Forgot about that.
Thanks,
tglx
