From: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Cc: thuth@redhat.com, borntraeger@de.ibm.com,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, cohuck@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v4 4/9] s390x: smp: Rework cpu start and active tracking
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 09:25:25 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b088e6ea-bdc0-4833-7271-160a5085d9cf@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bf356a2c-702e-0ecd-d24c-f7a1b7c18d2a@redhat.com>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1976 bytes --]
On 1/21/20 6:40 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 21.01.20 14:42, Janosch Frank wrote:
>> The architecture specifies that processing sigp orders may be
>> asynchronous, and this is indeed the case on some hypervisors, so we
>> need to wait until the cpu runs before we return from the setup/start
>> function.
>>
>> As there was a lot of duplicate code, a common function for cpu
>> restarts has been introduced.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
>> ---
>> lib/s390x/smp.c | 50 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
>> 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/lib/s390x/smp.c b/lib/s390x/smp.c
>> index f57f420..84e681d 100644
>> --- a/lib/s390x/smp.c
>> +++ b/lib/s390x/smp.c
>> @@ -104,35 +104,46 @@ int smp_cpu_stop_store_status(uint16_t addr)
>> return rc;
>> }
>>
>> +static int smp_cpu_restart_nolock(uint16_t addr, struct psw *psw)
>> +{
>> + int rc;
>> + struct cpu *cpu = smp_cpu_from_addr(addr);
>> +
>> + if (!cpu)
>> + return -1;
>> + if (psw) {
>> + cpu->lowcore->restart_new_psw.mask = psw->mask;
>> + cpu->lowcore->restart_new_psw.addr = psw->addr;
>> + }
>> + rc = sigp(addr, SIGP_RESTART, 0, NULL);
>> + if (rc)
>> + return rc;
>> + /*
>> + * The order has been accepted, but the actual restart may not
>> + * have been performed yet, so wait until the cpu is running.
>> + */
>> + while (!smp_cpu_running(addr))
>> + mb();
>> + cpu->active = true;
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>
> Just wondering what happened to my comment
It probably got lost in your other change requests :)
>
> "Should you make sure to stop the CPU before issuing the restart?
> Otherwise you will get false positives if it is still running (but
> hasn't processed the RESTART yet)"
>
> ?
>
> IOW, should we have a SIGP_STOP before issuing the SIGP_RESTART?
Yes, that would be cleaner.
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-22 8:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-01-21 13:42 [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v4 0/9] s390x: smp: Improve smp code and reset checks Janosch Frank
2020-01-21 13:42 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v4 1/9] s390x: smp: Cleanup smp.c Janosch Frank
2020-01-21 13:42 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v4 2/9] s390x: smp: Only use smp_cpu_setup once Janosch Frank
2020-01-23 13:45 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-23 13:54 ` Janosch Frank
2020-01-23 13:56 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-24 8:28 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-24 8:38 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-21 13:42 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v4 3/9] s390x: Add cpu id to interrupt error prints Janosch Frank
2020-01-23 10:02 ` Janosch Frank
2020-01-23 10:03 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH] " Janosch Frank
2020-01-21 13:42 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v4 4/9] s390x: smp: Rework cpu start and active tracking Janosch Frank
2020-01-21 17:40 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-22 8:25 ` Janosch Frank [this message]
2020-01-23 9:14 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH] " Janosch Frank
2020-01-21 13:42 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v4 5/9] s390x: smp: Wait for cpu setup to finish Janosch Frank
2020-01-21 13:42 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v4 6/9] s390x: smp: Loop if secondary cpu returns into cpu setup again Janosch Frank
2020-01-21 14:28 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-01-21 17:36 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-23 13:32 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-23 13:47 ` Janosch Frank
2020-01-21 13:42 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v4 7/9] s390x: smp: Remove unneeded cpu loops Janosch Frank
2020-01-21 14:30 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-01-21 17:36 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-21 13:42 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v4 8/9] s390x: smp: Test all CRs on initial reset Janosch Frank
2020-01-21 13:42 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v4 9/9] s390x: smp: Dirty fpc before initial reset test Janosch Frank
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=b088e6ea-bdc0-4833-7271-160a5085d9cf@linux.ibm.com \
--to=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=thuth@redhat.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox