All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: tnt@246tNt.com, manfred@colorfullife.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org,
	paulus@samba.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] prevent powerpc from invoking irq handlers on offline CPUs
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2008 22:00:04 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080901050003.GN7015@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1220238880.13010.4.camel@pasglop>

On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 01:14:40PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-08-31 at 19:06 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 10:34:44AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2008-08-31 at 10:31 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > Make powerpc refrain from clearing a given to-be-offlined CPU's bit in the
> > > > cpu_online_mask until it has processed pending irqs.  This change
> > > > prevents other CPUs from being blindsided by an apparently offline CPU
> > > > nevertheless changing globally visible state.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > > > ---
> > > 
> > > Sounds reasonable... the only possible worry here is if somebody tries
> > > an IPI ... The IPI code will and the target CPU mask with the online
> > > map, so it may try to send to the to-be-offlined CPU and timeout, no ?
> > 
> > OK.  Do we need separate IPI and online masks?
> 
> Shouldn't we already have routed all interrupts to other CPUs anyway ?
> 
> IE. The affinity of all interrupts should have been updated. So the
> only thing we're going to get here are possibly IPIs and decrementer, 
> I don't see it being a big deal making sure we test we are online when
> receiving it.

It did look to me that the CPU removed itself from the interrupt queue
before re-enabling interrupts, so makes sense to me...

							Thanx, Paul

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, paulus@samba.org,
	jwboyer@linux.vnet.ibm.com, tnt@246tNt.com,
	grant.likely@secretlab.ca, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org,
	manfred@colorfullife.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] prevent powerpc from invoking irq handlers on offline CPUs
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2008 22:00:04 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080901050003.GN7015@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1220238880.13010.4.camel@pasglop>

On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 01:14:40PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-08-31 at 19:06 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 10:34:44AM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2008-08-31 at 10:31 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > > Make powerpc refrain from clearing a given to-be-offlined CPU's bit in the
> > > > cpu_online_mask until it has processed pending irqs.  This change
> > > > prevents other CPUs from being blindsided by an apparently offline CPU
> > > > nevertheless changing globally visible state.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > > > ---
> > > 
> > > Sounds reasonable... the only possible worry here is if somebody tries
> > > an IPI ... The IPI code will and the target CPU mask with the online
> > > map, so it may try to send to the to-be-offlined CPU and timeout, no ?
> > 
> > OK.  Do we need separate IPI and online masks?
> 
> Shouldn't we already have routed all interrupts to other CPUs anyway ?
> 
> IE. The affinity of all interrupts should have been updated. So the
> only thing we're going to get here are possibly IPIs and decrementer, 
> I don't see it being a big deal making sure we test we are online when
> receiving it.

It did look to me that the CPU removed itself from the interrupt queue
before re-enabling interrupts, so makes sense to me...

							Thanx, Paul

  reply	other threads:[~2008-09-01  5:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-08-31 17:31 [PATCH] prevent powerpc from invoking irq handlers on offline CPUs Paul E. McKenney
2008-08-31 17:31 ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-09-01  0:34 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-09-01  0:34   ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-09-01  2:06   ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-09-01  2:06     ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-09-01  3:14     ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-09-01  3:14       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-09-01  5:00       ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2008-09-01  5:00         ` Paul E. McKenney

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=20080901050003.GN7015@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
    --cc=manfred@colorfullife.com \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=tnt@246tNt.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.