All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] arm64: Reduce verbosity on SMP CPU stop
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 12:37:06 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160415113706.GE22906@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1460715876-10780-1-git-send-email-jglauber@cavium.com>

On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 12:24:36PM +0200, Jan Glauber wrote:
> When CPUs are stopped during an abnormal operation like panic
> for each CPU a line is printed and the stack trace is dumped.
> 
> This information is only interesting for the aborting CPU
> and on systems with many CPUs it only makes it harder to
> debug if after the aborting CPU the log is flooded with data
> about all other CPUs too.
> 
> Therefore remove the stack dump and printk of other CPUs
> and only print a single line that the other CPUs are going to be
> stopped.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jan Glauber <jglauber@cavium.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c | 11 +++--------
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
> index b2d5f4e..e6c2eb1 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
> @@ -770,14 +770,6 @@ static DEFINE_RAW_SPINLOCK(stop_lock);
>   */
>  static void ipi_cpu_stop(unsigned int cpu)
>  {
> -	if (system_state == SYSTEM_BOOTING ||
> -	    system_state == SYSTEM_RUNNING) {
> -		raw_spin_lock(&stop_lock);
> -		pr_crit("CPU%u: stopping\n", cpu);
> -		dump_stack();
> -		raw_spin_unlock(&stop_lock);
> -	}
> -
>  	set_cpu_online(cpu, false);
>  
>  	local_irq_disable();
> @@ -872,6 +864,9 @@ void smp_send_stop(void)
>  		cpumask_copy(&mask, cpu_online_mask);
>  		cpumask_clear_cpu(smp_processor_id(), &mask);
>  
> +		if (system_state == SYSTEM_BOOTING ||
> +		    system_state == SYSTEM_RUNNING)
> +			pr_crit("SMP: stopping secondary CPUs\n");

You can remove stop_lock altogether now, right? I also wonder whether
it would be worth printing out which CPUs are still online in the case where
we fail to stop all the secondaries?

Will

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: Jan Glauber <jglauber@cavium.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: Reduce verbosity on SMP CPU stop
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 12:37:06 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160415113706.GE22906@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1460715876-10780-1-git-send-email-jglauber@cavium.com>

On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 12:24:36PM +0200, Jan Glauber wrote:
> When CPUs are stopped during an abnormal operation like panic
> for each CPU a line is printed and the stack trace is dumped.
> 
> This information is only interesting for the aborting CPU
> and on systems with many CPUs it only makes it harder to
> debug if after the aborting CPU the log is flooded with data
> about all other CPUs too.
> 
> Therefore remove the stack dump and printk of other CPUs
> and only print a single line that the other CPUs are going to be
> stopped.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jan Glauber <jglauber@cavium.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c | 11 +++--------
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
> index b2d5f4e..e6c2eb1 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
> @@ -770,14 +770,6 @@ static DEFINE_RAW_SPINLOCK(stop_lock);
>   */
>  static void ipi_cpu_stop(unsigned int cpu)
>  {
> -	if (system_state == SYSTEM_BOOTING ||
> -	    system_state == SYSTEM_RUNNING) {
> -		raw_spin_lock(&stop_lock);
> -		pr_crit("CPU%u: stopping\n", cpu);
> -		dump_stack();
> -		raw_spin_unlock(&stop_lock);
> -	}
> -
>  	set_cpu_online(cpu, false);
>  
>  	local_irq_disable();
> @@ -872,6 +864,9 @@ void smp_send_stop(void)
>  		cpumask_copy(&mask, cpu_online_mask);
>  		cpumask_clear_cpu(smp_processor_id(), &mask);
>  
> +		if (system_state == SYSTEM_BOOTING ||
> +		    system_state == SYSTEM_RUNNING)
> +			pr_crit("SMP: stopping secondary CPUs\n");

You can remove stop_lock altogether now, right? I also wonder whether
it would be worth printing out which CPUs are still online in the case where
we fail to stop all the secondaries?

Will

  reply	other threads:[~2016-04-15 11:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-04-15 10:24 [PATCH] arm64: Reduce verbosity on SMP CPU stop Jan Glauber
2016-04-15 10:24 ` Jan Glauber
2016-04-15 11:37 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2016-04-15 11:37   ` Will Deacon
2016-04-18  7:43   ` [PATCH v2] " Jan Glauber
2016-04-18  7:43     ` Jan Glauber
2016-04-18 12:19     ` Will Deacon
2016-04-18 12:19       ` Will Deacon
2016-04-18 13:17       ` Jan Glauber
2016-04-18 13:17         ` Jan Glauber

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=20160415113706.GE22906@arm.com \
    --to=will.deacon@arm.com \
    --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.