| Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 12/22] arm64: Delay cpu feature checks | From | "Suzuki K. Poulose" <> | Date | Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:12:40 +0100 |
| |
On 08/10/15 12:08, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 06:02:01PM +0100, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote: >> + /* >> + * second pass allows enable() invoked on active each CPU >> + * to consider interacting capabilities. >> + */ > > This comment doesn't read properly. >
Fixed locally
>> + /*XXX: Are we really safe to call printk here ? */ >> + pr_crit("FATAL: CPU%d is missing %s : %s \n", >> + smp_processor_id(), cap_type, cap->desc); > > I'm not sure it's safe either, basically we haven't fully brought the > CPU into the system.
Btw, we already print "Booted secondary cpu" from secondary_start_kernel() before we trigger the notifiers. So I think it should be safe to call it at the moment.
> >> + asm volatile( >> + " 1: wfe \n\t" >> + " b 1b\n" >> + ); >> +} > > We could add a wfi as well in the mix. > > However, if we have PSCI, we should use it to park the CPUs back into > firmware (via cpu_operations.cpu_die), and only use the above loop if > that fails.
Added cpu_die() and falls back to the trap as above.
> >> +/* >> + * Run through the enabled system capabilities and enable() it on this CPU. > > s/it/them/ >
Fixed.
Thanks Suzuki
|