[PATCH v1] smp: Fix up and expand the smp_call_function_many() kerneldoc

Posted by Rafael J. Wysocki 5 months ago

From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>

The smp_call_function_many() kerneldoc comment got out of sync with the
function definition (bool parameter "wait" is incorrectly described as a
bitmask in it), so fix it up by copying the "wait" description from the
smp_call_function() kerneldoc and add information regarding the handling
of the local CPU to it.

Fixes: 49b3bd213a9f ("smp: Fix all kernel-doc warnings")
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
---
 kernel/smp.c |   11 +++++------
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

--- a/kernel/smp.c
+++ b/kernel/smp.c
@@ -884,16 +884,15 @@ static void smp_call_function_many_cond(
  * @mask: The set of cpus to run on (only runs on online subset).
  * @func: The function to run. This must be fast and non-blocking.
  * @info: An arbitrary pointer to pass to the function.
- * @wait: Bitmask that controls the operation. If %SCF_WAIT is set, wait
- *        (atomically) until function has completed on other CPUs. If
- *        %SCF_RUN_LOCAL is set, the function will also be run locally
- *        if the local CPU is set in the @cpumask.
- *
- * If @wait is true, then returns once @func has returned.
+ * @wait: If true, wait (atomically) until function has completed
+ *        on other CPUs.
  *
  * You must not call this function with disabled interrupts or from a
  * hardware interrupt handler or from a bottom half handler. Preemption
  * must be disabled when calling this function.
+ *
+ * @func is not called on the local CPU even if @mask contains it.  Consider
+ * using on_each_cpu_cond_mask() instead if this is not desirable.
  */
 void smp_call_function_many(const struct cpumask *mask,
 			    smp_call_func_t func, void *info, bool wait)

Re: [PATCH v1] smp: Fix up and expand the smp_call_function_many() kerneldoc

Posted by Rafael J. Wysocki 4 months, 3 weeks ago

On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 1:44 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
>
> The smp_call_function_many() kerneldoc comment got out of sync with the
> function definition (bool parameter "wait" is incorrectly described as a
> bitmask in it), so fix it up by copying the "wait" description from the
> smp_call_function() kerneldoc and add information regarding the handling
> of the local CPU to it.
>
> Fixes: 49b3bd213a9f ("smp: Fix all kernel-doc warnings")
> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>

It's been a week and no feedback.

Well, in the further absence of any, I'll assume no concerns and just
queue this up.

> ---
>  kernel/smp.c |   11 +++++------
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/kernel/smp.c
> +++ b/kernel/smp.c
> @@ -884,16 +884,15 @@ static void smp_call_function_many_cond(
>   * @mask: The set of cpus to run on (only runs on online subset).
>   * @func: The function to run. This must be fast and non-blocking.
>   * @info: An arbitrary pointer to pass to the function.
> - * @wait: Bitmask that controls the operation. If %SCF_WAIT is set, wait
> - *        (atomically) until function has completed on other CPUs. If
> - *        %SCF_RUN_LOCAL is set, the function will also be run locally
> - *        if the local CPU is set in the @cpumask.
> - *
> - * If @wait is true, then returns once @func has returned.
> + * @wait: If true, wait (atomically) until function has completed
> + *        on other CPUs.
>   *
>   * You must not call this function with disabled interrupts or from a
>   * hardware interrupt handler or from a bottom half handler. Preemption
>   * must be disabled when calling this function.
> + *
> + * @func is not called on the local CPU even if @mask contains it.  Consider
> + * using on_each_cpu_cond_mask() instead if this is not desirable.
>   */
>  void smp_call_function_many(const struct cpumask *mask,
>                             smp_call_func_t func, void *info, bool wait)
>
>
>
>

Re: [PATCH v1] smp: Fix up and expand the smp_call_function_many() kerneldoc

Posted by Thomas Gleixner 4 months, 3 weeks ago

On Tue, Sep 16 2025 at 16:13, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 1:44 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
>>
>> The smp_call_function_many() kerneldoc comment got out of sync with the
>> function definition (bool parameter "wait" is incorrectly described as a
>> bitmask in it), so fix it up by copying the "wait" description from the
>> smp_call_function() kerneldoc and add information regarding the handling
>> of the local CPU to it.
>>
>> Fixes: 49b3bd213a9f ("smp: Fix all kernel-doc warnings")
>> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
>
> It's been a week and no feedback.
>
> Well, in the further absence of any, I'll assume no concerns and just
> queue this up.

Sorry, was distracted. No objections from my side. Did you queue it
already?

Re: [PATCH v1] smp: Fix up and expand the smp_call_function_many() kerneldoc

Posted by Rafael J. Wysocki 4 months, 3 weeks ago

On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 10:31 AM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 16 2025 at 16:13, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 1:44 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> >>
> >> The smp_call_function_many() kerneldoc comment got out of sync with the
> >> function definition (bool parameter "wait" is incorrectly described as a
> >> bitmask in it), so fix it up by copying the "wait" description from the
> >> smp_call_function() kerneldoc and add information regarding the handling
> >> of the local CPU to it.
> >>
> >> Fixes: 49b3bd213a9f ("smp: Fix all kernel-doc warnings")
> >> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> >
> > It's been a week and no feedback.
> >
> > Well, in the further absence of any, I'll assume no concerns and just
> > queue this up.
>
> Sorry, was distracted. No objections from my side. Did you queue it
> already?

No, I didn't.

Re: [PATCH v1] smp: Fix up and expand the smp_call_function_many() kerneldoc

Posted by Thomas Gleixner 4 months, 3 weeks ago

On Thu, Sep 18 2025 at 12:05, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 10:31 AM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 16 2025 at 16:13, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>
>> > On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 1:44 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
>> >>
>> >> The smp_call_function_many() kerneldoc comment got out of sync with the
>> >> function definition (bool parameter "wait" is incorrectly described as a
>> >> bitmask in it), so fix it up by copying the "wait" description from the
>> >> smp_call_function() kerneldoc and add information regarding the handling
>> >> of the local CPU to it.
>> >>
>> >> Fixes: 49b3bd213a9f ("smp: Fix all kernel-doc warnings")
>> >> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
>> >
>> > It's been a week and no feedback.
>> >
>> > Well, in the further absence of any, I'll assume no concerns and just
>> > queue this up.
>>
>> Sorry, was distracted. No objections from my side. Did you queue it
>> already?
>
> No, I didn't.

I pick it up

Re: [PATCH v1] smp: Fix up and expand the smp_call_function_many() kerneldoc

Posted by Rafael J. Wysocki 4 months, 3 weeks ago

On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 10:17 PM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 18 2025 at 12:05, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 10:31 AM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, Sep 16 2025 at 16:13, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 1:44 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> >> >>
> >> >> The smp_call_function_many() kerneldoc comment got out of sync with the
> >> >> function definition (bool parameter "wait" is incorrectly described as a
> >> >> bitmask in it), so fix it up by copying the "wait" description from the
> >> >> smp_call_function() kerneldoc and add information regarding the handling
> >> >> of the local CPU to it.
> >> >>
> >> >> Fixes: 49b3bd213a9f ("smp: Fix all kernel-doc warnings")
> >> >> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> >> >
> >> > It's been a week and no feedback.
> >> >
> >> > Well, in the further absence of any, I'll assume no concerns and just
> >> > queue this up.
> >>
> >> Sorry, was distracted. No objections from my side. Did you queue it
> >> already?
> >
> > No, I didn't.
>
> I pick it up

Thanks!

[tip: smp/core] smp: Fix up and expand the smp_call_function_many() kerneldoc

Posted by tip-bot2 for Rafael J. Wysocki 4 months, 3 weeks ago

The following commit has been merged into the smp/core branch of tip:

Commit-ID:     ccf09357ffef2ab472369ab9cdf470c9bc9b821a
Gitweb:        https://git.kernel.org/tip/ccf09357ffef2ab472369ab9cdf470c9bc9b821a
Author:        Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
AuthorDate:    Tue, 09 Sep 2025 13:44:14 +02:00
Committer:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
CommitterDate: Thu, 18 Sep 2025 22:21:28 +02:00

smp: Fix up and expand the smp_call_function_many() kerneldoc

The smp_call_function_many() kerneldoc comment got out of sync with the
function definition (bool parameter "wait" is incorrectly described as a
bitmask in it), so fix it up by copying the "wait" description from the
smp_call_function() kerneldoc and add information regarding the handling
of the local CPU to it.

Fixes: 49b3bd213a9f ("smp: Fix all kernel-doc warnings")
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
---
 kernel/smp.c | 11 +++++------
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/smp.c b/kernel/smp.c
index 56f83aa..02f5229 100644
--- a/kernel/smp.c
+++ b/kernel/smp.c
@@ -884,16 +884,15 @@ static void smp_call_function_many_cond(const struct cpumask *mask,
  * @mask: The set of cpus to run on (only runs on online subset).
  * @func: The function to run. This must be fast and non-blocking.
  * @info: An arbitrary pointer to pass to the function.
- * @wait: Bitmask that controls the operation. If %SCF_WAIT is set, wait
- *        (atomically) until function has completed on other CPUs. If
- *        %SCF_RUN_LOCAL is set, the function will also be run locally
- *        if the local CPU is set in the @cpumask.
- *
- * If @wait is true, then returns once @func has returned.
+ * @wait: If true, wait (atomically) until function has completed
+ *        on other CPUs.
  *
  * You must not call this function with disabled interrupts or from a
  * hardware interrupt handler or from a bottom half handler. Preemption
  * must be disabled when calling this function.
+ *
+ * @func is not called on the local CPU even if @mask contains it.  Consider
+ * using on_each_cpu_cond_mask() instead if this is not desirable.
  */
 void smp_call_function_many(const struct cpumask *mask,
 			    smp_call_func_t func, void *info, bool wait)