From: k.kozlowski@samsung.com (Krzysztof Kozlowski)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2] ARM: Don't use complete() during __cpu_die
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2015 12:00:58 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1423134058.25197.9.camel@AMDC1943> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150205105035.GL8656@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
On czw, 2015-02-05 at 10:50 +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.
>
> You're modifying arch/arm/kernel/smp.c, so you just hook it directly
> into the IPI mechanism without any registration required.
>
> We can also kill the second cache flush by the dying CPU - as we're
> not writing to memory anymore by calling complete() after the first
> cache flush, so this will probably make CPU hotplug fractionally faster
> too.
>
> (You'll get some fuzz with this patch as I have the NMI backtrace stuff
> in my kernel.)
>
> Something like this - only build tested so far (waiting for the compile
> to finish...):
I am looking into IPI also. Maybe just smp_call_function_any() would be
enough?
Do you want to continue with the IPI version patch?
Best regards,
Krzysztof
>
> arch/arm/kernel/smp.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>
> 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
> };
>
> /* For reliability, we're prepared to waste bits here. */
> @@ -88,6 +91,14 @@ void __init smp_set_ops(struct smp_operations *ops)
> smp_ops = *ops;
> };
>
> +static void (*__smp_cross_call)(const struct cpumask *, unsigned int);
> +
> +void __init set_smp_cross_call(void (*fn)(const struct cpumask *, unsigned int))
> +{
> + if (!__smp_cross_call)
> + __smp_cross_call = fn;
> +}
> +
> static unsigned long get_arch_pgd(pgd_t *pgd)
> {
> phys_addr_t pgdir = virt_to_idmap(pgd);
> @@ -267,19 +278,13 @@ void __ref cpu_die(void)
> flush_cache_louis();
>
> /*
> - * Tell __cpu_die() that this CPU is now safe to dispose of. Once
> - * this returns, power and/or clocks can be removed at any point
> + * Tell __cpu_die() that this CPU is now safe to dispose of. We
> + * do this via an IPI to any online CPU - it doesn't matter, we
> + * just need another CPU to run the completion. Once this IPI
> + * has been sent, power and/or clocks can be removed at any point
> * from this CPU and its cache by platform_cpu_kill().
> */
> - complete(&cpu_died);
> -
> - /*
> - * Ensure that the cache lines associated with that completion are
> - * written out. This covers the case where _this_ CPU is doing the
> - * powering down, to ensure that the completion is visible to the
> - * CPU waiting for this one.
> - */
> - flush_cache_louis();
> + __smp_cross_call(cpumask_of(cpumask_any(cpu_online_mask)), IPI_CPU_DEAD);
>
> /*
> * The actual CPU shutdown procedure is at least platform (if not
> @@ -442,14 +447,6 @@ void __init smp_prepare_cpus(unsigned int max_cpus)
> }
> }
>
> -static void (*__smp_cross_call)(const struct cpumask *, unsigned int);
> -
> -void __init set_smp_cross_call(void (*fn)(const struct cpumask *, unsigned int))
> -{
> - if (!__smp_cross_call)
> - __smp_cross_call = fn;
> -}
> -
> static const char *ipi_types[NR_IPI] __tracepoint_string = {
> #define S(x,s) [x] = s
> S(IPI_WAKEUP, "CPU wakeup interrupts"),
> @@ -648,6 +645,14 @@ void handle_IPI(int ipinr, struct pt_regs *regs)
> irq_exit();
> break;
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU
> + case IPI_CPU_DEAD:
> + irq_enter();
> + complete(&cpu_died);
> + irq_exit();
> + break;
> +#endif
> +
> default:
> pr_crit("CPU%u: Unknown IPI message 0x%x\n",
> cpu, ipinr);
>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: Don't use complete() during __cpu_die
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2015 12:00:58 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1423134058.25197.9.camel@AMDC1943> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150205105035.GL8656@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
On czw, 2015-02-05 at 10:50 +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.
>
> You're modifying arch/arm/kernel/smp.c, so you just hook it directly
> into the IPI mechanism without any registration required.
>
> We can also kill the second cache flush by the dying CPU - as we're
> not writing to memory anymore by calling complete() after the first
> cache flush, so this will probably make CPU hotplug fractionally faster
> too.
>
> (You'll get some fuzz with this patch as I have the NMI backtrace stuff
> in my kernel.)
>
> Something like this - only build tested so far (waiting for the compile
> to finish...):
I am looking into IPI also. Maybe just smp_call_function_any() would be
enough?
Do you want to continue with the IPI version patch?
Best regards,
Krzysztof
>
> arch/arm/kernel/smp.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>
> 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
> };
>
> /* For reliability, we're prepared to waste bits here. */
> @@ -88,6 +91,14 @@ void __init smp_set_ops(struct smp_operations *ops)
> smp_ops = *ops;
> };
>
> +static void (*__smp_cross_call)(const struct cpumask *, unsigned int);
> +
> +void __init set_smp_cross_call(void (*fn)(const struct cpumask *, unsigned int))
> +{
> + if (!__smp_cross_call)
> + __smp_cross_call = fn;
> +}
> +
> static unsigned long get_arch_pgd(pgd_t *pgd)
> {
> phys_addr_t pgdir = virt_to_idmap(pgd);
> @@ -267,19 +278,13 @@ void __ref cpu_die(void)
> flush_cache_louis();
>
> /*
> - * Tell __cpu_die() that this CPU is now safe to dispose of. Once
> - * this returns, power and/or clocks can be removed at any point
> + * Tell __cpu_die() that this CPU is now safe to dispose of. We
> + * do this via an IPI to any online CPU - it doesn't matter, we
> + * just need another CPU to run the completion. Once this IPI
> + * has been sent, power and/or clocks can be removed at any point
> * from this CPU and its cache by platform_cpu_kill().
> */
> - complete(&cpu_died);
> -
> - /*
> - * Ensure that the cache lines associated with that completion are
> - * written out. This covers the case where _this_ CPU is doing the
> - * powering down, to ensure that the completion is visible to the
> - * CPU waiting for this one.
> - */
> - flush_cache_louis();
> + __smp_cross_call(cpumask_of(cpumask_any(cpu_online_mask)), IPI_CPU_DEAD);
>
> /*
> * The actual CPU shutdown procedure is at least platform (if not
> @@ -442,14 +447,6 @@ void __init smp_prepare_cpus(unsigned int max_cpus)
> }
> }
>
> -static void (*__smp_cross_call)(const struct cpumask *, unsigned int);
> -
> -void __init set_smp_cross_call(void (*fn)(const struct cpumask *, unsigned int))
> -{
> - if (!__smp_cross_call)
> - __smp_cross_call = fn;
> -}
> -
> static const char *ipi_types[NR_IPI] __tracepoint_string = {
> #define S(x,s) [x] = s
> S(IPI_WAKEUP, "CPU wakeup interrupts"),
> @@ -648,6 +645,14 @@ void handle_IPI(int ipinr, struct pt_regs *regs)
> irq_exit();
> break;
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU
> + case IPI_CPU_DEAD:
> + irq_enter();
> + complete(&cpu_died);
> + irq_exit();
> + break;
> +#endif
> +
> default:
> pr_crit("CPU%u: Unknown IPI message 0x%x\n",
> cpu, ipinr);
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-05 11:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 92+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-05 10:14 [PATCH v2] ARM: Don't use complete() during __cpu_die Krzysztof Kozlowski
2015-02-05 10:14 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2015-02-05 10:50 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-05 10:50 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-05 11:00 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski [this message]
2015-02-05 11:00 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2015-02-05 11:08 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-05 11:08 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-05 11:28 ` Mark Rutland
2015-02-05 11:28 ` Mark Rutland
2015-02-05 11:30 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-05 11:30 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-05 14:29 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-02-05 14:29 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-02-05 16:11 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-05 16:11 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-05 17:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-02-05 17:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-02-05 17:34 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-05 17:34 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-05 17:54 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-02-05 17:54 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-02-10 1:24 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-10 1:24 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-10 1:37 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-02-10 1:37 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-02-10 2:05 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-10 2:05 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-10 3:05 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-02-10 3:05 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-02-10 15:14 ` Mark Rutland
2015-02-10 15:14 ` Mark Rutland
2015-02-10 20:48 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-10 20:48 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-10 21:04 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-10 21:04 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-10 21:15 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-10 21:15 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-10 21:49 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-10 21:49 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-10 22:05 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-10 22:05 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-13 15:52 ` Mark Rutland
2015-02-13 15:52 ` Mark Rutland
2015-02-13 16:27 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-13 16:27 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-13 17:21 ` Mark Rutland
2015-02-13 17:21 ` Mark Rutland
2015-02-13 17:30 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-13 17:30 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-13 16:28 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-13 16:28 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-13 15:38 ` Mark Rutland
2015-02-13 15:38 ` Mark Rutland
2015-02-10 20:58 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-10 20:58 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-10 15:41 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-10 15:41 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-10 18:33 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-10 18:33 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-25 12:56 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-25 12:56 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-25 16:47 ` Nicolas Pitre
2015-02-25 16:47 ` Nicolas Pitre
2015-02-25 17:00 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-25 17:00 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-25 18:13 ` Nicolas Pitre
2015-02-25 18:13 ` Nicolas Pitre
2015-02-25 20:16 ` Nicolas Pitre
2015-02-25 20:16 ` Nicolas Pitre
2015-02-26 1:05 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-02-26 1:05 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-03-22 23:30 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-03-22 23:30 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-03-23 12:55 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-03-23 12:55 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-03-23 13:21 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-03-23 13:21 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-03-23 14:00 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-03-23 14:00 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-03-23 15:37 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-03-23 15:37 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-03-23 16:56 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-03-23 16:56 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-02-26 19:14 ` Daniel Thompson
2015-02-26 19:14 ` Daniel Thompson
2015-02-26 19:47 ` Nicolas Pitre
2015-02-26 19:47 ` Nicolas Pitre
2015-02-05 10:53 ` Mark Rutland
2015-02-05 10:53 ` Mark Rutland
2015-02-05 10:59 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2015-02-05 10:59 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
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=1423134058.25197.9.camel@AMDC1943 \
--to=k.kozlowski@samsung.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/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.