From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 17:36:11 +0000 From: Will Deacon Subject: Re: [PATCH] kexec: disable non-boot CPUs Message-ID: <20121220173611.GC5387@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> References: <1355960681-32015-1-git-send-email-swarren@wwwdotorg.org> <20121220104945.GC16887@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> <50D34934.9070106@wwwdotorg.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <50D34934.9070106@wwwdotorg.org> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: kexec-bounces@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: kexec-bounces+dwmw2=infradead.org@lists.infradead.org To: Stephen Warren Cc: "linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org" , "kexec@lists.infradead.org" , Stephen Warren , Eric Biederman , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 05:21:56PM +0000, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 12/20/2012 03:49 AM, Will Deacon wrote: > > If you do manage to get this merged, please can you follow up with a patch > > to remove the smp_kill_cpus bits from arch/arm/kernel/smp.c please? It only > > exists as a hook to do exactly this and currently nobody is using it afaict. > > I originally implemented this in > arch/arm/kernel/process.c:machine_shutdown(), which currently is: > > void machine_shutdown(void) > { > #ifdef CONFIG_SMP > smp_send_stop(); > #endif > } > > and I changed it to something like: > > void machine_shutdown(void) > { > #ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU > disable_nonboot_cpus(); > #elifdef CONFIG_SMP > smp_send_stop(); > #endif > } > > ... but then figured that moving it up into the core kexec code would be > better, so that everything always worked the same way. Hmmm, isn't this racy: requiring the secondaries to hit idle and notice they're offline and call cpu_die before the primary has replace the kernel image? > Anyway, the change above addresses Eric's concern about isolating the > change to ARM. Does that seem like a reasonable thing for the ARM code > to do? I think you're better off using what we currently have and hanging your code off platform_cpu_kill. Will _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec