From: Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] ARM: smp: Only expose /sys/.../cpuX/online if hotpluggable
Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2015 01:06:11 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150408010610.GA29030@verge.net.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150407145635.GI12732@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 03:56:35PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 06, 2015 at 01:24:13PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > Writes to /sys/.../cpuX/online fail if we determine the platform
> > doesn't support hotplug for that CPU. Furthermore, if the cpu_die
> > op isn't specified the system hangs when we try to offline a CPU
> > and it comes right back online unexpectedly. Let's figure this
> > stuff out before we make the sysfs nodes so that the online file
> > doesn't even exist if it isn't (at least sometimes) possible to
> > hotplug the CPU.
> >
> > Add a new 'cpu_can_disable' op and repoint all 'cpu_disable'
> > implementations at it because all implementers use the op to
> > indicate if a CPU can be hotplugged or not in a static fashion.
> > With PSCI we may need to add a 'cpu_disable' op so that the
> > secure OS can be migrated off the CPU we're trying to hotplug.
> > In this case, the 'cpu_can_disable' op will indicate that all
> > CPUs are hotpluggable by returning true, but the 'cpu_disable' op
> > will make a PSCI migration call and occasionally fail, denying
> > the hotplug of a CPU. This shouldn't be any worse than x86 where
> > we may indicate that all CPUs are hotpluggable but occasionally
> > we can't offline a CPU due to check_irq_vectors_for_cpu_disable()
> > failing to find a CPU to move vectors to.
> >
> > Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> > Cc: Nicolas Pitre <nico@linaro.org>
> > Cc: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
> > Cc: Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>
> > Cc: Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com>
> > Cc: <linux-sh@vger.kernel.org>
> > Cc: Tyler Baker <tyler.baker@linaro.org>
> > Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
>
> I think this is fine, but I'd like to see some acks for it. As it's
> mostly core ARM stuff, it should be merged through my tree unless there
> is a known conflict with arm-soc. Thanks.
I'm happy with the shmobile portions and have verified that
they don't conflict with anything I have queued up for v4.1.
So in the context of that release, for the shmobile portion:
Acked-by: Simon Horman <horms+renesas@verge.net.au>
I also tested, and the effected shmobile boards still seem to boot
with this patch applied.
Tested-by: Simon Horman <horms+renesas@verge.net.au>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: horms@verge.net.au (Simon Horman)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v4] ARM: smp: Only expose /sys/.../cpuX/online if hotpluggable
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2015 10:06:11 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150408010610.GA29030@verge.net.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150407145635.GI12732@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 03:56:35PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 06, 2015 at 01:24:13PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > Writes to /sys/.../cpuX/online fail if we determine the platform
> > doesn't support hotplug for that CPU. Furthermore, if the cpu_die
> > op isn't specified the system hangs when we try to offline a CPU
> > and it comes right back online unexpectedly. Let's figure this
> > stuff out before we make the sysfs nodes so that the online file
> > doesn't even exist if it isn't (at least sometimes) possible to
> > hotplug the CPU.
> >
> > Add a new 'cpu_can_disable' op and repoint all 'cpu_disable'
> > implementations at it because all implementers use the op to
> > indicate if a CPU can be hotplugged or not in a static fashion.
> > With PSCI we may need to add a 'cpu_disable' op so that the
> > secure OS can be migrated off the CPU we're trying to hotplug.
> > In this case, the 'cpu_can_disable' op will indicate that all
> > CPUs are hotpluggable by returning true, but the 'cpu_disable' op
> > will make a PSCI migration call and occasionally fail, denying
> > the hotplug of a CPU. This shouldn't be any worse than x86 where
> > we may indicate that all CPUs are hotpluggable but occasionally
> > we can't offline a CPU due to check_irq_vectors_for_cpu_disable()
> > failing to find a CPU to move vectors to.
> >
> > Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> > Cc: Nicolas Pitre <nico@linaro.org>
> > Cc: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
> > Cc: Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>
> > Cc: Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com>
> > Cc: <linux-sh@vger.kernel.org>
> > Cc: Tyler Baker <tyler.baker@linaro.org>
> > Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
>
> I think this is fine, but I'd like to see some acks for it. As it's
> mostly core ARM stuff, it should be merged through my tree unless there
> is a known conflict with arm-soc. Thanks.
I'm happy with the shmobile portions and have verified that
they don't conflict with anything I have queued up for v4.1.
So in the context of that release, for the shmobile portion:
Acked-by: Simon Horman <horms+renesas@verge.net.au>
I also tested, and the effected shmobile boards still seem to boot
with this patch applied.
Tested-by: Simon Horman <horms+renesas@verge.net.au>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Nicolas Pitre <nico@linaro.org>,
Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com>,
linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, Tyler Baker <tyler.baker@linaro.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] ARM: smp: Only expose /sys/.../cpuX/online if hotpluggable
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2015 10:06:11 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150408010610.GA29030@verge.net.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150407145635.GI12732@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
On Tue, Apr 07, 2015 at 03:56:35PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 06, 2015 at 01:24:13PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > Writes to /sys/.../cpuX/online fail if we determine the platform
> > doesn't support hotplug for that CPU. Furthermore, if the cpu_die
> > op isn't specified the system hangs when we try to offline a CPU
> > and it comes right back online unexpectedly. Let's figure this
> > stuff out before we make the sysfs nodes so that the online file
> > doesn't even exist if it isn't (at least sometimes) possible to
> > hotplug the CPU.
> >
> > Add a new 'cpu_can_disable' op and repoint all 'cpu_disable'
> > implementations at it because all implementers use the op to
> > indicate if a CPU can be hotplugged or not in a static fashion.
> > With PSCI we may need to add a 'cpu_disable' op so that the
> > secure OS can be migrated off the CPU we're trying to hotplug.
> > In this case, the 'cpu_can_disable' op will indicate that all
> > CPUs are hotpluggable by returning true, but the 'cpu_disable' op
> > will make a PSCI migration call and occasionally fail, denying
> > the hotplug of a CPU. This shouldn't be any worse than x86 where
> > we may indicate that all CPUs are hotpluggable but occasionally
> > we can't offline a CPU due to check_irq_vectors_for_cpu_disable()
> > failing to find a CPU to move vectors to.
> >
> > Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> > Cc: Nicolas Pitre <nico@linaro.org>
> > Cc: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
> > Cc: Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>
> > Cc: Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com>
> > Cc: <linux-sh@vger.kernel.org>
> > Cc: Tyler Baker <tyler.baker@linaro.org>
> > Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
>
> I think this is fine, but I'd like to see some acks for it. As it's
> mostly core ARM stuff, it should be merged through my tree unless there
> is a known conflict with arm-soc. Thanks.
I'm happy with the shmobile portions and have verified that
they don't conflict with anything I have queued up for v4.1.
So in the context of that release, for the shmobile portion:
Acked-by: Simon Horman <horms+renesas@verge.net.au>
I also tested, and the effected shmobile boards still seem to boot
with this patch applied.
Tested-by: Simon Horman <horms+renesas@verge.net.au>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-04-08 1:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-06 20:24 [PATCH v4] ARM: smp: Only expose /sys/.../cpuX/online if hotpluggable Stephen Boyd
2015-04-06 20:24 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-04-06 20:24 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-04-07 14:56 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-04-07 14:56 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-04-07 14:56 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-04-08 1:06 ` Simon Horman [this message]
2015-04-08 1:06 ` Simon Horman
2015-04-08 1:06 ` Simon Horman
2015-04-07 16:18 ` Tyler Baker
2015-04-07 16:18 ` Tyler Baker
2015-04-07 16:18 ` Tyler Baker
2015-04-07 17:58 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-04-07 17:58 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-04-07 17:58 ` Stephen Boyd
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=20150408010610.GA29030@verge.net.au \
--to=horms@verge.net.au \
--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.