All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	manpreet@fabric7.com,
	lkml - Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	discuss@x86-64.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i386/x86-64: Fix timer SMP bootup race
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 16:09:19 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1105765760.12263.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050115040951.GC13525@wotan.suse.de>

On Sat, 2005-01-15 at 05:09 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Fix boot up SMP race in timer setup on i386/x86-64.
> 
> This fixes a long standing race in 2.6 i386/x86-64 SMP boot.
> The per CPU timers would only get initialized after an secondary
> CPU was running. But during initialization the secondary CPU would
> already enable interrupts to compute the jiffies. When a per 
> CPU timer fired in this window it would run into a BUG in timer.c
> because the timer heap for that CPU wasn't fully initialized.
> 
> The race only happens when a CPU takes a long time to boot
> (e.g. very slow console output with debugging enabled).
> 
> To fix I added a new cpu notifier notifier command CPU_UP_PREPARE_EARLY
> that is called before the secondary CPU is started. timer.c
> uses that now to initialize the per CPU timers early before
> the other CPU runs any Linux code.

Andi, that's horrible.  I suspect you know it's horrible and were hoping
someone would fix it properly.  The semantics of CPU_UP_PREPARE are
supposed to do this already.

The cause of this bug is that (1) i386 and x86_64 actually bring the
secondary CPUs up at boot before the core code officially brings them up
using cpu_up(), after the appropriate callbacks, and (2) they call into
core code tp process timer interrupts before they've been officially
brought up.

The former is because I just added a shim rather than rewriting the x86
boot process, because it would have broken too much.  The fix is do the
boot process properly, or to suppress the call to do_timer before the
CPU is actually "up".

Sorry,
Rusty.
-- 
A bad analogy is like a leaky screwdriver -- Richard Braakman


  reply	other threads:[~2005-01-15  5:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-01-15  4:09 [PATCH] i386/x86-64: Fix timer SMP bootup race Andi Kleen
2005-01-15  5:09 ` Rusty Russell [this message]
2005-01-15  5:23   ` Andi Kleen
2005-01-15  7:34     ` Rusty Russell
2005-01-15  7:40       ` Andrew Morton
2005-01-15  7:59       ` Andi Kleen
2005-01-16  4:20         ` Rusty Russell
2005-01-16  5:34           ` Andi Kleen
2005-01-16  6:42             ` Rusty Russell
2005-01-15  6:28 ` Andrew Morton
2005-01-15  6:43   ` Andi Kleen
2005-01-15  6:54     ` Andrew Morton
2005-01-15  7:18       ` Andi Kleen
2005-01-17  2:34 ` Rusty Russell
2005-01-17  5:43   ` Andi Kleen

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1105765760.12263.12.camel@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
    --cc=ak@suse.de \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=discuss@x86-64.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=manpreet@fabric7.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.