![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Tue, 07 Nov 2006 09:20:27 +0800 Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com> wrote: > On Mon, 2006-11-06 at 15:15 +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > Hi, > > > > if the microcode driver is built in (rather than module) there are some, > > ehm, interesting effects happening due to the new "call out to > > userspace" behavior that is introduced.. and which runs too early. The > > result is a boot hang; which is really nasty. > > > > The patch below is a minimally safe patch to fix this regression for > > 2.6.19 by just not requesting actual microcode updates during early > > boot. (That is a good idea in general anyway) > > > > The "real" fix is a lot more complex given the entire cpu hotplug > > scenario (during cpu hotplug you normally need to load the microcode as > > well); but the interactions for that are just really messy at this > > point; this fix at least makes it work and avoids a full detangle of > > hotplug. > Yes, this is an issue which I documented in my patch. It's not a hang, > but a long delay if you have many cpus. Due to the timeout? So it should come back after 10*num_online_cpus seconds? Does Arjan have a lot of CPUs? > Other drivers with firmware > request have the same issue if they are built-in. Maybe we should fix > the firmware request mechanism itself. I hope no distribution has > microcode driver built-in. But what would a fix look like? I think things would work OK if all the appropriate stuff is present in initramfs, yes? We wouldn't want to break that. hm. kobject_uevent() stupidly returns void. If we were to fix that, is there any reason why _request_firmware() should still wait for ten seconds if kobject_uevent() returned a synchronous error? (ie: __call_usermodehelper failed?) Answer: yes. That won't work because request_firmware() uses call_usermodehelper(wait=0) (iirc this bad thing was done because of deadlock problems which were hard to fix properly). But all it not lost - because call_usermodehelper() will use CLONE_VFORK I _think_ we can still work out whether the child thread successfully exec'ed a new program. It'd take a bit of hacking on the fork() code to make that work though. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-11-07 03:05 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||