From: Aravind Gopalakrishnan <aravind.gopalakrishnan@amd.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] speeding up cpu_up()
Date: Fri, 1 May 2015 19:42:52 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55441D8C.2080509@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150501224729.GN10239@pd.tnic>
On 5/1/15 5:47 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Fri, May 01, 2015 at 02:42:39PM -0700, Len Brown wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 12:15 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>>> So instead of playing games with an ancient delay, I'd suggest we
>>> install the 10 msec INIT assertion wait as a platform quirk instead,
>>> and activate it for all CPUs/systems that we think might need it, with
>>> a sufficiently robust and future-proof quirk cutoff condition.
>>>
>>> New systems won't have the quirk active and thus won't have to have
>>> this delay configurable either.
>> Okay, at this time, I think the quirk would apply to:
>>
>> 1. Intel family 5 (original pentium) -- some may actually need the quirk
>> 2. Intel family F (pentium4) -- mostly b/c I don't want to bother
>> finding/testing p4
>> 3. All AMD (happy to narrow down, if somebody can speak for AMD)
> Aravind and I could probably test on a couple of AMD boxes to narrow down.
>
> @Aravind, see here:
>
> https://lkml.kernel.org/r/87d69aab88c14d65ae1e7be55050d1b689b59b4b.1429402494.git.len.brown@intel.com
>
> You could ask around whether a timeout is needed between the assertion
> and deassertion of INIT done by the BSP when booting other cores.
Sure, I'll ask around and try mdelay(0) on some systems as well.
I can gather Fam15h, Fam16h but don't have K8's or older.
Will let you know how it goes.
-Aravind.
> If not, we probably should convert, at least modern AMD machines, to the
> no-delay default.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-05-02 0:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-19 0:53 [PATCH 0/1] speeding up cpu_up() Len Brown
2015-04-19 0:53 ` [PATCH 1/1] x86: replace cpu_up hard-coded mdelay with variable Len Brown
2015-04-20 7:13 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-04-20 12:37 ` Brown, Len
2015-04-20 17:45 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-04-22 5:40 ` Paul Gortmaker
2015-04-22 6:07 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-01 21:02 ` Len Brown
2015-04-20 7:15 ` [PATCH 0/1] speeding up cpu_up() Ingo Molnar
2015-05-01 21:42 ` Len Brown
2015-05-01 22:47 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-05-02 0:42 ` Aravind Gopalakrishnan [this message]
2015-05-03 16:13 ` Aravind Gopalakrishnan
2015-05-04 22:45 ` Aravind Gopalakrishnan
2015-05-05 7:15 ` Borislav Petkov
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=55441D8C.2080509@amd.com \
--to=aravind.gopalakrishnan@amd.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--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.