From: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/smpboot: Check for cpu_active on cpu initialization
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 17:18:31 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150720151831.GK13082@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150720151000.GB12256@nazgul.tnic>
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 05:10:00PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 05:02:40PM +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> > I have seen a report where this happens on bare metal, when the change
> > to the cpu_active bit becomes visible on the other CPU significantly
> > later than the the cpu_online bit. This happened on a pretty big machine
> > with 88 cores.
>
> So how about what I proposed at the end of my previous mail?
Oh sorry, I missed that. Setting cpu_active first should work on x86,
where writes become visible in the order they are executed. But this
function is in generic code and I have no idea what this change might
break on other architectures.
In the end cpu_active means that the scheduler can push tasks to the
CPU, no idea if some arch code breaks when the scheduler is already
working on a CPU before it becomes visibly online.
Joerg
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-20 15:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-16 9:17 [PATCH] x86/smpboot: Check for cpu_active on cpu initialization Joerg Roedel
2015-07-20 14:46 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-07-20 15:02 ` Joerg Roedel
2015-07-20 15:10 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-07-20 15:18 ` Joerg Roedel [this message]
2015-07-20 15:27 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-07-27 18:21 ` [PATCH] sched: fix cpu_active_mask/cpu_online_mask race Jan H. Schönherr
2015-07-30 16:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-30 19:17 ` [PATCH v2] " Jan H. Schönherr
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=20150720151831.GK13082@suse.de \
--to=jroedel@suse.de \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--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.