public inbox for kexec@lists.infradead.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: len.brown@intel.com, fenghua.yu@intel.com, x86@kernel.org,
	kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	rob.herring@calxeda.com, grant.likely@secretlab.ca,
	HATAYAMA Daisuke <d.hatayama@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@elte.hu, vgoyal@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] x86, apic: Disable BSP if boot cpu is AP
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 13:43:21 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87a9vedyqe.fsf@xmission.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5085AD7D.106@zytor.com> (H. Peter Anvin's message of "Mon, 22 Oct 2012 13:33:01 -0700")

"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> writes:

> On 10/22/2012 01:31 PM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>>
>>> IIRC Fenghua experimented with that and it didn't work.  Not all BIOSes
>>> use that bit to determine BSP-ness.
>> 
>> What does a BIOS have to do with anything?
>> 
>> The practical issue here is does an INIT IPI cause the cpu to go into
>> startup-ipi-wait or to start booting at 4G-16 bytes.
>> 
>> For dealing with BIOSen we may still need to use the bootstrap processor
>> for firmware calls, cpu suspend, and other firmware weirdness, but that
>> should all be completely orthogonal to the behavior to what happens
>> when an INIT IPI is sent to the cpu.
>> 
>> The only firmware problem I can imagine having is cpu virtualization
>> bug.
>> 
>
> The whole problem is that some BIOSes go wonky after receiving an INIT
> (as in INIT-SIPI-SIPI) to the BSP.

The reason the BIOSen go wonky is the INIT cause the cpu to go to the
reset vector at 4G-16 bytes.  So it is very much expected that the
BIOSen start acting like you just came out of reset.

If you can clear bit 8 of IA32_APIC_BASE_MSR and inform the cpu to not
send the cpu to 4G-16 bytes and instead send the cpu into it's magic
startup-ipi-wait mode then the BIOSen will not be involved on that path.

It is a simple question of does the cpu support clearing bit 8
meaningfully.

If the cpu allows bit 8 to be cleared and sends the cpu to the reset
vector on receipt of the INIT IPI I would call that a deviation from the
x86 cpu specification.

So clearing bit 8 is not a question about BIOSen it is a question of can
we avoid the BIOSen, by using an obscure under-documented cpu feature.

Eric

_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec

  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-10-22 20:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-10-16  4:35 [PATCH v1 0/2] x86, apic: Disable BSP if boot cpu is AP HATAYAMA Daisuke
2012-10-16  4:35 ` [PATCH v1 1/2] x86, apic: Introduce boot_cpu_is_bsp indicating whether boot cpu is BSP or not HATAYAMA Daisuke
2012-10-16  4:35 ` [PATCH v1 2/2] x86, apic: Disable BSP if boot cpu is AP HATAYAMA Daisuke
2012-10-22 20:04   ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-10-22 20:16     ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-10-22 20:31       ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-10-22 20:33         ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-10-22 20:38           ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-10-22 20:43           ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2012-10-22 20:47             ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-10-22 21:29               ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-10-23  0:35                 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-10-26  3:24                   ` HATAYAMA Daisuke
2012-10-26  4:13                     ` Eric W. Biederman
2013-03-11  1:07                       ` HATAYAMA Daisuke
2013-03-11  2:13                         ` HATAYAMA Daisuke
2013-03-11  4:11                           ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-10-16  4:51 ` [PATCH v1 0/2] " Yu, Fenghua
2012-10-16  5:03   ` HATAYAMA Daisuke
2012-10-16  5:14     ` Yu, Fenghua
2012-10-16  6:38       ` HATAYAMA Daisuke
2012-10-22 16:02         ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-10-16  5:15     ` HATAYAMA Daisuke
2012-10-17 14:12 ` Vivek Goyal
2012-10-18  3:08   ` HATAYAMA Daisuke
2012-10-18 14:14     ` Vivek Goyal
2012-10-19  3:20       ` HATAYAMA Daisuke
2012-10-19 15:17         ` Vivek Goyal
2012-10-22  6:32           ` HATAYAMA Daisuke
2012-10-22 18:37             ` Vivek Goyal
2012-10-22 17:10           ` Michael Holzheu

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=87a9vedyqe.fsf@xmission.com \
    --to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=d.hatayama@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
    --cc=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=len.brown@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=rob.herring@calxeda.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
    --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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox