Re: why is the the smp_mb() in arm64's barrier.h "dmb ish"?

2014-04-30 Thread Leif Lindholm
Hi Kelvin. On 30 April 2014 10:52, wrote: > In arch/arm64/include/asm/barrier.h, there is the definition of > smp_mb()/smp_rmb()/smp_wmb() for arm64. I noticed that all the 3 macors are > using “dmb ishxx”, which is only affect the cluster of the CPU executing the > instruction. This is incorre

why is the the smp_mb() in arm64's barrier.h "dmb ish"?

2014-04-30 Thread KelvinKLi
Hi All, In arch/arm64/include/asm/barrier.h, there is the definition of smp_mb()/smp_rmb()/smp_wmb() for arm64. I noticed that all the 3 macors are using "dmb ishxx", which is only affect the cluster of the CPU executing the instruction. But in the big.LITTLE system, there will be 2 cluster.

Re: [PATCH PMQA] cpuidle_killer: allocate per cpu process array dynamically

2014-04-30 Thread Mohammad Merajul Islam Molla
Hello Sanjay, As far I know, if option argument is 0, the parent will wait for specified child pid to terminate, its not for immediate return as in case of WNOHANG. This is probably the intended use of the code (author will be able to confirm). Changing 0 to WNOHANG macro will change the meaning o

Re: [PATCH PMQA] cpuidle_killer: allocate per cpu process array dynamically

2014-04-30 Thread Sanjay Singh Rawat
On Wednesday 30 April 2014 12:14 PM, Mohammad Merajul Islam Molla wrote: Hello, I would like to share two observations - 1. Is it necessary to initialize nrcpus = 2 anymore? thanks, ack 2. Another problem may happen in the code below where waitpid is called - for (i = 0; i < nrcpus; i++)