Quoting Doug Anderson (2023-08-25 16:02:46)

On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 3:27 PM Stephen Boyd [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Quoting Douglas Anderson (2023-08-24 08:30:30)

quoted

diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/irq.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/irq.h

 static int ipi_irq_base __read_mostly;
 static int nr_ipi __read_mostly = NR_IPI;
-static struct irq_desc *ipi_desc[NR_IPI] __read_mostly;
+static struct irq_desc *ipi_desc[MAX_IPI] __read_mostly;

Side note: it would be nice to mark ipi_desc as __ro_after_init. Same
for nr_ipi and ipi_irq_base.

I'd rather not change it in this patch since it's a pre-existing and
separate issue, but I can add a patch to the end of the series for
that if I end up spinning it. Otherwise I can send a follow-up patch
for it.

Of course. Don't change it in this patch.

quoted

quoted

 static void ipi_setup(int cpu);

@@ -845,6 +852,22 @@ static void __noreturn ipi_cpu_crash_stop(unsigned int cpu, struct pt_regs *regs
 #endif
 }

+static void arm64_backtrace_ipi(cpumask_t *mask)
+{
+       __ipi_send_mask(ipi_desc[IPI_CPU_BACKTRACE], mask);
+}
+
+void arch_trigger_cpumask_backtrace(const cpumask_t *mask, int exclude_cpu)

Can this be 'bool exclude_self' instead of int? That matches all other
implementations from what I can tell.

Nope. See the part of the commit message that says:

This patch depends on commit 36759e343ff9 ("nmi_backtrace: allow
excluding an arbitrary CPU") since that commit changed the prototype
of arch_trigger_cpumask_backtrace(), which this patch implements.

Ah, ok. Sounds fine then.

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel