From: Ryan Harper <ryanh@us.ibm.com>
To: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@cl.cam.ac.uk>
Cc: Ian Pratt <m+Ian.Pratt@cl.cam.ac.uk>,
xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH] SMP dom0 boot fix
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 09:59:30 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20051028145930.GL22394@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5916684ed3d62883c5aa18c358b24b21@cl.cam.ac.uk>
* Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@cl.cam.ac.uk> [2005-10-28 09:20]:
>
> On 28 Oct 2005, at 02:05, Kamble, Nitin A wrote:
>
> > This patch reverts part of the 7402 patch. The reverted part is
> >conversion from unsigned long to uint32_t for evtchn_pending,
> >evtchn_mask.
>
> That was the original *point* of the patch, so yours is basically the
> anti-patch.
>
> I can take a look... what is the bad SMP dom0 behaviour you are seeing
> (is there a bugzilla reference)?
I'll file a bug if Nitin doesn't beat me to it. I was seeing
smp_call_function() blocking while it waited for a function to return
from being invoked on the second processor in early boot.
It would block forever installing the deadline io scheduler, digging
deeper, it was after the second processor was up, and the io schedulers
call kmem_cache_create() in mm/slab.c, which would eventually result in
a call to smp_call_function() and passed in wait=1 which forces the
function to block until it has run on all online processors.
WARK: CPU0 in enable_cpucache()
WARK: CPU0 do_tune_cpucache() in
WARK: CPU0 calling all cpus with do_ccupdate_local()
WARK: CPU0 smp_call_function_all_cpus()
WARK: CPU0 running do_ccupdate_local()
WARK: CPU0 invoking smp_call_function()
At this point send_IPI_allbutself() has been invoked and the system
just sits and waits on CPU1 to run the function. But, CPU1's
evtchn_upcall_mask was set (1), so I'm guessing the pending interrupt
is never acknowledged.
--
Ryan Harper
Software Engineer; Linux Technology Center
IBM Corp., Austin, Tx
(512) 838-9253 T/L: 678-9253
ryanh@us.ibm.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-10-28 14:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-10-28 1:05 [PATCH] SMP dom0 boot fix Kamble, Nitin A
2005-10-28 7:31 ` Keir Fraser
2005-10-28 14:59 ` Ryan Harper [this message]
2005-10-28 15:15 ` Keir Fraser
2005-10-28 15:45 ` Keir Fraser
2005-10-28 16:07 ` Ryan Harper
2005-10-28 17:27 ` Ky Srinivasan
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-10-28 14:34 Puthiyaparambil, Aravindh
2005-10-28 17:13 Kamble, Nitin A
2005-10-28 23:52 Ian Pratt
2005-10-31 18:32 ` Ky Srinivasan
2005-10-31 18:32 ` Ky Srinivasan
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=20051028145930.GL22394@us.ibm.com \
--to=ryanh@us.ibm.com \
--cc=Keir.Fraser@cl.cam.ac.uk \
--cc=m+Ian.Pratt@cl.cam.ac.uk \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.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.