lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Jun]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 05/27] xen, cpu hotplug: Don't call cpu_bringup() in xen_play_dead()
>>> On 01.06.12 at 17:13, "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
wrote:
> On 06/01/2012 06:29 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>
>>>>> On 01.06.12 at 11:11, "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> wrote:
>>> xen_play_dead calls cpu_bringup() which looks weird, because xen_play_dead()
>>> is invoked in the cpu down path, whereas cpu_bringup() (as the name
>>> suggests) is useful in the cpu bringup path.
>>
>> This might not be correct - the code as it is without this change is
>> safe even when the vCPU gets onlined back later by an external
>> entity (e.g. the Xen tool stack), and it would in that case resume
>> at the return point of the VCPUOP_down hypercall. That might
>> be a heritage from the original XenoLinux tree though, and be
>> meaningless in pv-ops context - Jeremy, Konrad?
>>
>> Possibly it was bogus/unused even in that original tree - Keir?
>>
>
>
> Thanks for your comments Jan!
>
> In case this change is wrong, the other method I had in mind was to call
> cpu_bringup_and_idle() in xen_play_dead(). (Even ARM does something similar,
> in the sense that it runs the cpu bringup code including cpu_idle(), in the
> cpu offline path, namely the cpu_die() function). Would that approach work
> for xen as well? If yes, then we wouldn't have any issues to convert xen to
> generic code.

No, that wouldn't work either afaict - the function is expected
to return.

Jan



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-06-01 18:01    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans