lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Feb]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2] ARM: Don't use complete() during __cpu_die
Hi Russell,

On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 10:50:35AM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 11:14:30AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > The complete() should not be used on offlined CPU. Rewrite the
> > wait-complete mechanism with wait_on_bit_timeout().
>
> Yuck.
>
> I think that the IPI idea would be far better, and a much smaller patch.
> We can continue using the completions, but instead of running the
> completion on the dying CPU, the dying CPU triggers an IPI which does
> the completion on the requesting CPU.

This does look _much_ nicer than the bitmask approach.

[...]

> diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/smp.c b/arch/arm/kernel/smp.c
> index 194df2f1aa87..c623e27a9c85 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/kernel/smp.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/smp.c
> @@ -73,6 +73,9 @@ enum ipi_msg_type {
> IPI_IRQ_WORK,
> IPI_COMPLETION,
> IPI_CPU_BACKTRACE,
> +#ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU
> + IPI_CPU_DEAD,
> +#endif
> };

[...]

> static const char *ipi_types[NR_IPI] __tracepoint_string = {
> #define S(x,s) [x] = s
> S(IPI_WAKEUP, "CPU wakeup interrupts"),

We'll probably want to add an entry here ("CPU teardown interrupts"?),
and bump NR_IPI in asm/hardirq.h.

Thanks,
Mark.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-02-05 12:41    [W:0.147 / U:0.324 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site