All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
Cc: Keerthy <j-keerthy@ti.com>, "Andrew F. Davis" <afd@ti.com>,
	Tero Kristo <t-kristo@ti.com>,
	Santosh Shilimkar <ssantosh@kernel.org>,
	linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3] ARM: omap2+: Revert omap-smp.c changes resetting CPU1 during boot
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 13:12:15 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170328201215.GB10760@atomide.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170328191524.GM23750@n2100.armlinux.org.uk>

* Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@armlinux.org.uk> [170328 12:17]:
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 10:09:44AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > OK so how about the following to disable kexec for Andrew's
> > test case?
> 
> That won't work - the hook you're using is to decide whether a particular
> CPU (normally the boot CPU) can be hot-plugged.  It isn't expected to
> return false for all.
> 
> The code in question is:
> 
>         /*
>          * Validate that if the current HW supports SMP, then the SW supports
>          * and implements CPU hotplug for the current HW. If not, we won't be
>          * able to kexec reliably, so fail the prepare operation.
>          */
>         if (num_possible_cpus() > 1 && platform_can_secondary_boot() &&
>             !platform_can_cpu_hotplug())
>                 return -EINVAL;
> 
> and:
> 
> int platform_can_cpu_hotplug(void)
> {
> #ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU
>         if (smp_ops.cpu_kill)
>                 return 1;
> #endif
> 
>         return 0;
> }
> 
> Platforms don't get a say in that, other than whether they implement
> the operations necessary for hotplug.

Yeah OK so a separate dra7_hs_smp_ops with no cpu_kill initialized
should do the trick, right?

Regards,

Tony

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: tony@atomide.com (Tony Lindgren)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCHv3] ARM: omap2+: Revert omap-smp.c changes resetting CPU1 during boot
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 13:12:15 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170328201215.GB10760@atomide.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170328191524.GM23750@n2100.armlinux.org.uk>

* Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@armlinux.org.uk> [170328 12:17]:
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 10:09:44AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > OK so how about the following to disable kexec for Andrew's
> > test case?
> 
> That won't work - the hook you're using is to decide whether a particular
> CPU (normally the boot CPU) can be hot-plugged.  It isn't expected to
> return false for all.
> 
> The code in question is:
> 
>         /*
>          * Validate that if the current HW supports SMP, then the SW supports
>          * and implements CPU hotplug for the current HW. If not, we won't be
>          * able to kexec reliably, so fail the prepare operation.
>          */
>         if (num_possible_cpus() > 1 && platform_can_secondary_boot() &&
>             !platform_can_cpu_hotplug())
>                 return -EINVAL;
> 
> and:
> 
> int platform_can_cpu_hotplug(void)
> {
> #ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU
>         if (smp_ops.cpu_kill)
>                 return 1;
> #endif
> 
>         return 0;
> }
> 
> Platforms don't get a say in that, other than whether they implement
> the operations necessary for hotplug.

Yeah OK so a separate dra7_hs_smp_ops with no cpu_kill initialized
should do the trick, right?

Regards,

Tony

  reply	other threads:[~2017-03-28 20:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-03-14 18:05 [PATCHv3] ARM: omap2+: Revert omap-smp.c changes resetting CPU1 during boot Tony Lindgren
2017-03-14 18:05 ` Tony Lindgren
2017-03-15  9:41 ` Keerthy
2017-03-15  9:41   ` Keerthy
2017-03-27 16:33 ` Andrew F. Davis
2017-03-27 16:33   ` Andrew F. Davis
2017-03-27 16:43   ` Tony Lindgren
2017-03-27 16:43     ` Tony Lindgren
2017-03-28 11:36     ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2017-03-28 11:36       ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2017-03-28 17:09       ` Tony Lindgren
2017-03-28 17:09         ` Tony Lindgren
2017-03-28 17:52         ` Andrew F. Davis
2017-03-28 17:52           ` Andrew F. Davis
2017-03-28 18:51           ` Tony Lindgren
2017-03-28 18:51             ` Tony Lindgren
2017-03-28 19:15         ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2017-03-28 19:15           ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2017-03-28 20:12           ` Tony Lindgren [this message]
2017-03-28 20:12             ` Tony Lindgren
2017-03-28 11:33   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2017-03-28 11:33     ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2017-03-28 17:53     ` Andrew F. Davis
2017-03-28 17:53       ` Andrew F. Davis

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=20170328201215.GB10760@atomide.com \
    --to=tony@atomide.com \
    --cc=afd@ti.com \
    --cc=j-keerthy@ti.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
    --cc=ssantosh@kernel.org \
    --cc=t-kristo@ti.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.