All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, kexec-list <kexec@lists.infradead.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, kdump: No need to disable ioapic in crash path
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2012 16:57:41 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120207215741.GD5650@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m1r4ycsts1.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org>

On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 03:24:46PM -0800, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> > Eric, brought up a point that because the boot code was restructured we may
> > not need to disable the io apic any more in the crash path.  The original
> > concern that led to the development of disable_IO_APIC, was that the TSC
> > calibration on boot up relied on the PIT timer for reference.  Access
> > to the PIT required 8259 interrupts to be working.  This wouldn't work
> > if the ioapic needed to be configured.  So on panic path, the ioapic was
> > reconfigured to use virtual wire mode to allow the 8259 to passthrough.
> 
> A small clarification originally it was the jiffies calibration that
> would fail if we could cause the PIT to generate interrupts through the
> 8259.  The boot would then hang at calibrating jiffies.

Ok.  Thanks!

> 
> > Those concerns don't hold true now, thanks to the fast TSC calibration code
> > not needing the PIT.  As a result, we can remove this call and simplify the
> > locking needed in the panic path.
> >
> > I tested kdump on an Ivy Bridge platform, a Pentium4 and an old athlon that
> > did not have an ioapic.  All three were successful.
> >
> > Cc: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
> > Cc: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
> >
> > ---
> > I will probably need some help with my explaination as to why this line is not
> > needed.  Any input is appreciated!
> 
> Can you test and verify that we also do not need the lapic_shutdown()
> call and the disable_local_APIC call on the other processors.  The same
> reasoning that supports us not needing to disable the IO_APIC also
> supports us not needing to disable local apic.

I did that and it seemed to work on my Ivy Bridge and core2 quad systems.

> 
> Removing disable_IO_APIC in and of itself and then booting isn't quite
> sufficient as a practical test to prove this code always works.
> Sometimes the IOAPIC was not hooked up to interesting interrupt sources
> like the 8259.

So what systems should I look for to test?

Cheers,
Don

_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	kexec-list <kexec@lists.infradead.org>,
	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, kdump: No need to disable ioapic in crash path
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2012 16:57:41 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120207215741.GD5650@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m1r4ycsts1.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org>

On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 03:24:46PM -0800, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> > Eric, brought up a point that because the boot code was restructured we may
> > not need to disable the io apic any more in the crash path.  The original
> > concern that led to the development of disable_IO_APIC, was that the TSC
> > calibration on boot up relied on the PIT timer for reference.  Access
> > to the PIT required 8259 interrupts to be working.  This wouldn't work
> > if the ioapic needed to be configured.  So on panic path, the ioapic was
> > reconfigured to use virtual wire mode to allow the 8259 to passthrough.
> 
> A small clarification originally it was the jiffies calibration that
> would fail if we could cause the PIT to generate interrupts through the
> 8259.  The boot would then hang at calibrating jiffies.

Ok.  Thanks!

> 
> > Those concerns don't hold true now, thanks to the fast TSC calibration code
> > not needing the PIT.  As a result, we can remove this call and simplify the
> > locking needed in the panic path.
> >
> > I tested kdump on an Ivy Bridge platform, a Pentium4 and an old athlon that
> > did not have an ioapic.  All three were successful.
> >
> > Cc: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
> > Cc: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
> >
> > ---
> > I will probably need some help with my explaination as to why this line is not
> > needed.  Any input is appreciated!
> 
> Can you test and verify that we also do not need the lapic_shutdown()
> call and the disable_local_APIC call on the other processors.  The same
> reasoning that supports us not needing to disable the IO_APIC also
> supports us not needing to disable local apic.

I did that and it seemed to work on my Ivy Bridge and core2 quad systems.

> 
> Removing disable_IO_APIC in and of itself and then booting isn't quite
> sufficient as a practical test to prove this code always works.
> Sometimes the IOAPIC was not hooked up to interesting interrupt sources
> like the 8259.

So what systems should I look for to test?

Cheers,
Don

  reply	other threads:[~2012-02-07 22:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-02-02 18:12 [PATCH] x86, kdump: No need to disable ioapic in crash path Don Zickus
2012-02-02 18:12 ` Don Zickus
2012-02-02 23:24 ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-02-02 23:24   ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-02-07 21:57   ` Don Zickus [this message]
2012-02-07 21:57     ` Don Zickus
2012-02-07 22:19     ` Vivek Goyal
2012-02-07 22:19       ` Vivek Goyal
2012-02-07 23:35       ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-02-07 23:35         ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-02-08 20:11         ` Don Zickus
2012-02-08 20:11           ` Don Zickus
2012-02-08 22:55           ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-02-08 22:55             ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-02-09 14:48             ` Don Zickus
2012-02-09 14:48               ` Don Zickus
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2012-02-29 20:08 Don Zickus
2012-02-29 20:08 ` Don Zickus
2012-03-15 20:26 ` Don Zickus
2012-03-15 20:26   ` Don Zickus
2012-03-15 21:16   ` Seiji Aguchi
2012-03-15 21:16     ` Seiji Aguchi
2012-03-15 21:33     ` Don Zickus
2012-03-15 21:33       ` Don Zickus
2012-03-15 21:37       ` Seiji Aguchi
2012-03-15 21:37         ` Seiji Aguchi
2012-04-30 20:53     ` Don Zickus
2012-04-30 20:53       ` Don Zickus
2012-05-02 19:10       ` Seiji Aguchi
2012-05-02 19:10         ` Seiji Aguchi
2012-05-02 19:39         ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-05-02 19:39           ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-05-02 19:59           ` Don Zickus
2012-05-02 19:59             ` Don Zickus
2012-05-02 20:24             ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-05-02 20:24               ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-03-29 16:02 ` Don Zickus
2012-03-29 16:02   ` Don Zickus

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=20120207215741.GD5650@redhat.com \
    --to=dzickus@redhat.com \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.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.