On Fri, 2015-02-27 at 07:33 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 26.02.15 at 17:53, <li...@eikelenboom.it> wrote: > > > Monday, February 23, 2015, 12:06:00 PM, you wrote: > > > >> I have no idea how I came to use __cpumask_set_cpu() there, the > >> conversion should have been set_bit() -> __set_bit(). The wrong > >> construct results in problems on systems with relatively few CPUs. > > > >> Reported-by: Sander Eikelenboom <li...@eikelenboom.it> > >> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> > > > >> --- a/xen/common/softirq.c > >> +++ b/xen/common/softirq.c > >> @@ -106,7 +106,7 @@ void cpu_raise_softirq(unsigned int cpu, > >> if ( !per_cpu(batching, this_cpu) || in_irq() ) > >> smp_send_event_check_cpu(cpu); > >> else > >> - __cpumask_set_cpu(nr, &per_cpu(batch_mask, this_cpu)); > >> + __set_bit(nr, &per_cpu(batch_mask, this_cpu)); > >> } > >> > >> void cpu_raise_softirq_batch_begin(void) > > > > Hi Jan, > > > > Any reason this wasn't applied to staging yet ? > > It didn't get ack-ed
Sorry, I thought this was an x86 patch for some reason and therefore that Andrew's ack was sufficient. For v2 of the patch (<54eb3d880200007800062...@mail.emea.novell.com>, using __cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, ...): Acked-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campb...@citrix.com> _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
