* [RFC 5/6]clean cpu state after hotremove CPU
@ 2005-04-04 2:07 Li Shaohua
[not found] ` <1112580367.4194.344.camel-U5EdaLXB8smDugQYiPIPGdh3ngVCH38I@public.gmane.org>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Li Shaohua @ 2005-04-04 2:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: lkml, ACPI-DEV; +Cc: Zwane Mwaikambo, Len Brown, Pavel Machek
Clean up all CPU states including its runqueue and idle thread,
so we can use boot time code without any changes.
Note this makes /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpux/online unworkable.
Thanks,
Shaohua
---
linux-2.6.11-root/arch/i386/kernel/cpu/common.c | 12 ++++
linux-2.6.11-root/arch/i386/kernel/irq.c | 5 +
linux-2.6.11-root/arch/i386/kernel/process.c | 20 +++++++
linux-2.6.11-root/arch/i386/kernel/smpboot.c | 44 ++++++++++++++++-
linux-2.6.11-root/include/asm-i386/irq.h | 2
linux-2.6.11-root/kernel/exit.c | 59 +++++++++++++++++++++++
linux-2.6.11-root/kernel/sched.c | 61 +++++++++++++++++++++---
7 files changed, 195 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff -puN arch/i386/kernel/process.c~cpu_state_clean arch/i386/kernel/process.c
--- linux-2.6.11/arch/i386/kernel/process.c~cpu_state_clean 2005-03-31 10:50:27.000000000 +0800
+++ linux-2.6.11-root/arch/i386/kernel/process.c 2005-04-04 09:07:29.172936768 +0800
@@ -144,12 +144,32 @@ static void poll_idle (void)
#ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU
#include <asm/nmi.h>
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_STR_SMP
+extern void cpu_exit_clear(int);
+#endif
+
/* We don't actually take CPU down, just spin without interrupts. */
static inline void play_dead(void)
{
+#ifdef CONFIG_STR_SMP
+ cpu_exit_clear(_smp_processor_id());
+#endif
+
/* Ack it */
__get_cpu_var(cpu_state) = CPU_DEAD;
+#ifdef CONFIG_STR_SMP
+ /*
+ * With physical CPU hotplug, we should halt the CPU
+ * Note: release idle task struct requires the CPU doesn't
+ * touch stack or anything else.
+ */
+ local_irq_disable();
+ while (1)
+ __asm__ __volatile__ ("hlt": : :"memory");
+#endif
+
/* We shouldn't have to disable interrupts while dead, but
* some interrupts just don't seem to go away, and this makes
* it "work" for testing purposes. */
diff -puN arch/i386/kernel/smpboot.c~cpu_state_clean arch/i386/kernel/smpboot.c
--- linux-2.6.11/arch/i386/kernel/smpboot.c~cpu_state_clean 2005-03-31 10:50:27.000000000 +0800
+++ linux-2.6.11-root/arch/i386/kernel/smpboot.c 2005-04-04 09:05:41.699275248 +0800
@@ -794,8 +794,13 @@ static int __devinit do_boot_cpu(int api
int timeout, cpu;
unsigned long start_eip;
unsigned short nmi_high = 0, nmi_low = 0;
+ cpumask_t tmp_map;
- cpu = ++cpucount;
+ cpus_complement(tmp_map, cpu_present_map);
+ cpu = first_cpu(tmp_map);
+ if (cpu >= NR_CPUS)
+ return -ENODEV;
+ ++cpucount;
/*
* We can't use kernel_thread since we must avoid to
* reschedule the child.
@@ -867,13 +872,16 @@ static int __devinit do_boot_cpu(int api
inquire_remote_apic(apicid);
}
}
- x86_cpu_to_apicid[cpu] = apicid;
+
if (boot_error) {
/* Try to put things back the way they were before ... */
unmap_cpu_to_logical_apicid(cpu);
cpu_clear(cpu, cpu_callout_map); /* was set here (do_boot_cpu()) */
cpu_clear(cpu, cpu_initialized); /* was set by cpu_init() */
cpucount--;
+ } else {
+ x86_cpu_to_apicid[cpu] = apicid;
+ cpu_set(cpu, cpu_present_map);
}
/* mark "stuck" area as not stuck */
@@ -882,6 +890,37 @@ static int __devinit do_boot_cpu(int api
return boot_error;
}
+#ifdef CONFIG_STR_SMP
+extern void do_exit_idle(void);
+extern void cpu_uninit(void);
+void cpu_exit_clear(int cpu)
+{
+ int sibling;
+ cpucount --;
+
+ cpu_uninit();
+
+ irq_ctx_exit(cpu);
+
+ cpu_clear(cpu, cpu_callout_map);
+ cpu_clear(cpu, cpu_callin_map);
+ cpu_clear(cpu, cpu_present_map);
+
+ x86_cpu_to_apicid[cpu] = BAD_APICID;
+
+ for_each_cpu_mask(sibling, cpu_sibling_map[cpu])
+ cpu_clear(cpu, cpu_sibling_map[sibling]);
+ cpus_clear(cpu_sibling_map[cpu]);
+
+ phys_proc_id[cpu] = BAD_APICID;
+
+ cpu_clear(cpu, smp_commenced_mask);
+
+ unmap_cpu_to_logical_apicid(cpu);
+
+ do_exit_idle();
+}
+#endif
static void smp_tune_scheduling (void)
{
unsigned long cachesize; /* kB */
@@ -1104,6 +1143,7 @@ void __devinit smp_prepare_boot_cpu(void
{
cpu_set(smp_processor_id(), cpu_online_map);
cpu_set(smp_processor_id(), cpu_callout_map);
+ cpu_set(smp_processor_id(), cpu_present_map);
}
#ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU
diff -puN arch/i386/kernel/cpu/common.c~cpu_state_clean arch/i386/kernel/cpu/common.c
--- linux-2.6.11/arch/i386/kernel/cpu/common.c~cpu_state_clean 2005-03-31 10:50:27.000000000 +0800
+++ linux-2.6.11-root/arch/i386/kernel/cpu/common.c 2005-03-31 10:50:27.000000000 +0800
@@ -621,3 +621,15 @@ void __devinit cpu_init (void)
clear_used_math();
mxcsr_feature_mask_init();
}
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_STR_SMP
+void __devinit cpu_uninit(void)
+{
+ int cpu = smp_processor_id();
+ cpu_clear(cpu, cpu_initialized);
+
+ /* lazy TLB state */
+ per_cpu(cpu_tlbstate, cpu).state = 0;
+ per_cpu(cpu_tlbstate, cpu).active_mm = &init_mm;
+}
+#endif
diff -puN include/asm-i386/irq.h~cpu_state_clean include/asm-i386/irq.h
--- linux-2.6.11/include/asm-i386/irq.h~cpu_state_clean 2005-03-31 10:50:27.000000000 +0800
+++ linux-2.6.11-root/include/asm-i386/irq.h 2005-03-31 10:50:27.000000000 +0800
@@ -29,9 +29,11 @@ extern void release_vm86_irqs(struct tas
#ifdef CONFIG_4KSTACKS
extern void irq_ctx_init(int cpu);
+ extern void irq_ctx_exit(int cpu);
# define __ARCH_HAS_DO_SOFTIRQ
#else
# define irq_ctx_init(cpu) do { } while (0)
+# define irq_ctx_exit(cpu) do { } while (0)
#endif
#ifdef CONFIG_IRQBALANCE
diff -puN arch/i386/kernel/irq.c~cpu_state_clean arch/i386/kernel/irq.c
--- linux-2.6.11/arch/i386/kernel/irq.c~cpu_state_clean 2005-03-31 10:50:27.000000000 +0800
+++ linux-2.6.11-root/arch/i386/kernel/irq.c 2005-03-31 10:50:27.000000000 +0800
@@ -153,6 +153,11 @@ void irq_ctx_init(int cpu)
cpu,hardirq_ctx[cpu],softirq_ctx[cpu]);
}
+void irq_ctx_exit(int cpu)
+{
+ hardirq_ctx[cpu] = NULL;
+}
+
extern asmlinkage void __do_softirq(void);
asmlinkage void do_softirq(void)
diff -puN kernel/exit.c~cpu_state_clean kernel/exit.c
--- linux-2.6.11/kernel/exit.c~cpu_state_clean 2005-03-31 10:50:27.000000000 +0800
+++ linux-2.6.11-root/kernel/exit.c 2005-03-31 10:50:27.000000000 +0800
@@ -845,6 +845,65 @@ fastcall NORET_TYPE void do_exit(long co
for (;;) ;
}
+#ifdef CONFIG_STR_SMP
+void do_exit_idle(void)
+{
+ struct task_struct *tsk = current;
+ int group_dead;
+
+ BUG_ON(tsk->pid);
+ BUG_ON(tsk->mm);
+
+ if (tsk->io_context)
+ exit_io_context();
+ tsk->flags |= PF_EXITING;
+ tsk->it_virt_expires = cputime_zero;
+ tsk->it_prof_expires = cputime_zero;
+ tsk->it_sched_expires = 0;
+
+ acct_update_integrals(tsk);
+ update_mem_hiwater(tsk);
+ group_dead = atomic_dec_and_test(&tsk->signal->live);
+ if (group_dead) {
+ del_timer_sync(&tsk->signal->real_timer);
+ acct_process(-1);
+ }
+ exit_mm(tsk);
+
+ exit_sem(tsk);
+ __exit_files(tsk);
+ __exit_fs(tsk);
+ exit_namespace(tsk);
+ exit_thread();
+ exit_keys(tsk);
+
+ if (group_dead && tsk->signal->leader)
+ disassociate_ctty(1);
+
+ module_put(tsk->thread_info->exec_domain->module);
+ if (tsk->binfmt)
+ module_put(tsk->binfmt->module);
+
+ tsk->exit_code = -1;
+ tsk->exit_state = EXIT_DEAD;
+
+ /* in release_task */
+ atomic_dec(&tsk->user->processes);
+ write_lock_irq(&tasklist_lock);
+ __exit_signal(tsk);
+ __exit_sighand(tsk);
+ write_unlock_irq(&tasklist_lock);
+ release_thread(tsk);
+ put_task_struct(tsk);
+
+ tsk->flags |= PF_DEAD;
+#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
+ mpol_free(tsk->mempolicy);
+ tsk->mempolicy = NULL;
+#endif
+}
+#endif
+
NORET_TYPE void complete_and_exit(struct completion *comp, long code)
{
if (comp)
diff -puN kernel/sched.c~cpu_state_clean kernel/sched.c
--- linux-2.6.11/kernel/sched.c~cpu_state_clean 2005-03-31 10:50:27.000000000 +0800
+++ linux-2.6.11-root/kernel/sched.c 2005-04-04 09:06:40.362357104 +0800
@@ -4028,6 +4028,58 @@ void __devinit init_idle(task_t *idle, i
}
/*
+ * Initial dummy domain for early boot and for hotplug cpu. Being static,
+ * it is initialized to zero, so all balancing flags are cleared which is
+ * what we want.
+ */
+static struct sched_domain sched_domain_dummy;
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_STR_SMP
+static void __devinit exit_idle(int cpu)
+{
+ runqueue_t *rq = cpu_rq(cpu);
+ struct task_struct *p = rq->idle;
+ int j, k;
+ prio_array_t *array;
+
+ /* init runqueue */
+ spin_lock_init(&rq->lock);
+ rq->active = rq->arrays;
+ rq->expired = rq->arrays + 1;
+ rq->best_expired_prio = MAX_PRIO;
+
+ rq->prev_mm = NULL;
+ rq->curr = rq->idle = NULL;
+ rq->expired_timestamp = 0;
+
+ rq->sd = &sched_domain_dummy;
+ rq->cpu_load = 0;
+ rq->active_balance = 0;
+ rq->push_cpu = 0;
+ rq->migration_thread = NULL;
+ INIT_LIST_HEAD(&rq->migration_queue);
+ atomic_set(&rq->nr_iowait, 0);
+
+ for (j = 0; j < 2; j++) {
+ array = rq->arrays + j;
+ for (k = 0; k < MAX_PRIO; k++) {
+ INIT_LIST_HEAD(array->queue + k);
+ __clear_bit(k, array->bitmap);
+ }
+ // delimiter for bitsearch
+ __set_bit(MAX_PRIO, array->bitmap);
+ }
+ /* Destroy IDLE thread.
+ * it's safe now, the CPU is in busy loop
+ */
+ if (p->active_mm)
+ mmdrop(p->active_mm);
+ p->active_mm = NULL;
+ put_task_struct(p);
+}
+#endif
+
+/*
* In a system that switches off the HZ timer nohz_cpu_mask
* indicates which cpus entered this state. This is used
* in the rcu update to wait only for active cpus. For system
@@ -4432,6 +4484,9 @@ static int migration_call(struct notifie
complete(&req->done);
}
spin_unlock_irq(&rq->lock);
+#ifdef CONFIG_STR_SMP
+ exit_idle(cpu);
+#endif
break;
#endif
}
@@ -4834,12 +4889,6 @@ static void __devinit arch_destroy_sched
#endif /* ARCH_HAS_SCHED_DOMAIN */
-/*
- * Initial dummy domain for early boot and for hotplug cpu. Being static,
- * it is initialized to zero, so all balancing flags are cleared which is
- * what we want.
- */
-static struct sched_domain sched_domain_dummy;
#ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU
/*
_
-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread[parent not found: <1112580367.4194.344.camel-U5EdaLXB8smDugQYiPIPGdh3ngVCH38I@public.gmane.org>]
* Re: [RFC 5/6]clean cpu state after hotremove CPU [not found] ` <1112580367.4194.344.camel-U5EdaLXB8smDugQYiPIPGdh3ngVCH38I@public.gmane.org> @ 2005-04-04 5:28 ` Nathan Lynch 2005-04-04 5:42 ` Li Shaohua 2005-04-04 19:11 ` Zwane Mwaikambo 1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Nathan Lynch @ 2005-04-04 5:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Li Shaohua; +Cc: lkml, ACPI-DEV, Zwane Mwaikambo, Len Brown, Pavel Machek On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 10:07:02AM +0800, Li Shaohua wrote: > Clean up all CPU states including its runqueue and idle thread, > so we can use boot time code without any changes. > Note this makes /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpux/online unworkable. In what sense does it make the online attribute unworkable? > diff -puN kernel/exit.c~cpu_state_clean kernel/exit.c > --- linux-2.6.11/kernel/exit.c~cpu_state_clean 2005-03-31 10:50:27.000000000 +0800 > +++ linux-2.6.11-root/kernel/exit.c 2005-03-31 10:50:27.000000000 +0800 > @@ -845,6 +845,65 @@ fastcall NORET_TYPE void do_exit(long co > for (;;) ; > } > > +#ifdef CONFIG_STR_SMP > +void do_exit_idle(void) > +{ > + struct task_struct *tsk = current; > + int group_dead; > + > + BUG_ON(tsk->pid); > + BUG_ON(tsk->mm); > + > + if (tsk->io_context) > + exit_io_context(); > + tsk->flags |= PF_EXITING; > + tsk->it_virt_expires = cputime_zero; > + tsk->it_prof_expires = cputime_zero; > + tsk->it_sched_expires = 0; > + > + acct_update_integrals(tsk); > + update_mem_hiwater(tsk); > + group_dead = atomic_dec_and_test(&tsk->signal->live); > + if (group_dead) { > + del_timer_sync(&tsk->signal->real_timer); > + acct_process(-1); > + } > + exit_mm(tsk); > + > + exit_sem(tsk); > + __exit_files(tsk); > + __exit_fs(tsk); > + exit_namespace(tsk); > + exit_thread(); > + exit_keys(tsk); > + > + if (group_dead && tsk->signal->leader) > + disassociate_ctty(1); > + > + module_put(tsk->thread_info->exec_domain->module); > + if (tsk->binfmt) > + module_put(tsk->binfmt->module); > + > + tsk->exit_code = -1; > + tsk->exit_state = EXIT_DEAD; > + > + /* in release_task */ > + atomic_dec(&tsk->user->processes); > + write_lock_irq(&tasklist_lock); > + __exit_signal(tsk); > + __exit_sighand(tsk); > + write_unlock_irq(&tasklist_lock); > + release_thread(tsk); > + put_task_struct(tsk); > + > + tsk->flags |= PF_DEAD; > +#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA > + mpol_free(tsk->mempolicy); > + tsk->mempolicy = NULL; > +#endif > +} > +#endif I don't understand why this is needed at all. It looks like a fair amount of code from do_exit is being duplicated here. We've been doing cpu removal on ppc64 logical partitions for a while and never needed to do anything like this. Maybe idle_task_exit would suffice? > diff -puN kernel/sched.c~cpu_state_clean kernel/sched.c > --- linux-2.6.11/kernel/sched.c~cpu_state_clean 2005-03-31 10:50:27.000000000 +0800 > +++ linux-2.6.11-root/kernel/sched.c 2005-04-04 09:06:40.362357104 +0800 > @@ -4028,6 +4028,58 @@ void __devinit init_idle(task_t *idle, i > } > > /* > + * Initial dummy domain for early boot and for hotplug cpu. Being static, > + * it is initialized to zero, so all balancing flags are cleared which is > + * what we want. > + */ > +static struct sched_domain sched_domain_dummy; > + > +#ifdef CONFIG_STR_SMP > +static void __devinit exit_idle(int cpu) > +{ > + runqueue_t *rq = cpu_rq(cpu); > + struct task_struct *p = rq->idle; > + int j, k; > + prio_array_t *array; > + > + /* init runqueue */ > + spin_lock_init(&rq->lock); > + rq->active = rq->arrays; > + rq->expired = rq->arrays + 1; > + rq->best_expired_prio = MAX_PRIO; > + > + rq->prev_mm = NULL; > + rq->curr = rq->idle = NULL; > + rq->expired_timestamp = 0; > + > + rq->sd = &sched_domain_dummy; > + rq->cpu_load = 0; > + rq->active_balance = 0; > + rq->push_cpu = 0; > + rq->migration_thread = NULL; > + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&rq->migration_queue); > + atomic_set(&rq->nr_iowait, 0); > + > + for (j = 0; j < 2; j++) { > + array = rq->arrays + j; > + for (k = 0; k < MAX_PRIO; k++) { > + INIT_LIST_HEAD(array->queue + k); > + __clear_bit(k, array->bitmap); > + } > + // delimiter for bitsearch > + __set_bit(MAX_PRIO, array->bitmap); > + } > + /* Destroy IDLE thread. > + * it's safe now, the CPU is in busy loop > + */ > + if (p->active_mm) > + mmdrop(p->active_mm); > + p->active_mm = NULL; > + put_task_struct(p); > +} > +#endif > + > +/* > * In a system that switches off the HZ timer nohz_cpu_mask > * indicates which cpus entered this state. This is used > * in the rcu update to wait only for active cpus. For system > @@ -4432,6 +4484,9 @@ static int migration_call(struct notifie > complete(&req->done); > } > spin_unlock_irq(&rq->lock); > +#ifdef CONFIG_STR_SMP > + exit_idle(cpu); > +#endif I don't understand the need for this, either. The existing cpu hotplug notifier in the scheduler takes care of initializing the sched domains and groups appropriately for online/offline events; why do you need to touch the runqueue structures? Nathan ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: Re: [RFC 5/6]clean cpu state after hotremove CPU 2005-04-04 5:28 ` Nathan Lynch @ 2005-04-04 5:42 ` Li Shaohua [not found] ` <1112593338.4194.362.camel-U5EdaLXB8smDugQYiPIPGdh3ngVCH38I@public.gmane.org> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Li Shaohua @ 2005-04-04 5:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Nathan Lynch; +Cc: lkml, ACPI-DEV, Zwane Mwaikambo, Len Brown, Pavel Machek Hi, On Mon, 2005-04-04 at 13:28, Nathan Lynch wrote: > On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 10:07:02AM +0800, Li Shaohua wrote: > > Clean up all CPU states including its runqueue and idle thread, > > so we can use boot time code without any changes. > > Note this makes /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpux/online unworkable. > > In what sense does it make the online attribute unworkable? I removed the idle thread and other CPU states, and makes the dead CPU into a 'halt' busy loop. > > > diff -puN kernel/exit.c~cpu_state_clean kernel/exit.c > > --- linux-2.6.11/kernel/exit.c~cpu_state_clean 2005-03-31 10:50:27.000000000 +0800 > > +++ linux-2.6.11-root/kernel/exit.c 2005-03-31 10:50:27.000000000 +0800 > > @@ -845,6 +845,65 @@ fastcall NORET_TYPE void do_exit(long co > > for (;;) ; > > } > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_STR_SMP > > +void do_exit_idle(void) > > +{ > > + struct task_struct *tsk = current; > > + int group_dead; > > + > > + BUG_ON(tsk->pid); > > + BUG_ON(tsk->mm); > > + > > + if (tsk->io_context) > > + exit_io_context(); > > + tsk->flags |= PF_EXITING; > > + tsk->it_virt_expires = cputime_zero; > > + tsk->it_prof_expires = cputime_zero; > > + tsk->it_sched_expires = 0; > > + > > + acct_update_integrals(tsk); > > + update_mem_hiwater(tsk); > > + group_dead = atomic_dec_and_test(&tsk->signal->live); > > + if (group_dead) { > > + del_timer_sync(&tsk->signal->real_timer); > > + acct_process(-1); > > + } > > + exit_mm(tsk); > > + > > + exit_sem(tsk); > > + __exit_files(tsk); > > + __exit_fs(tsk); > > + exit_namespace(tsk); > > + exit_thread(); > > + exit_keys(tsk); > > + > > + if (group_dead && tsk->signal->leader) > > + disassociate_ctty(1); > > + > > + module_put(tsk->thread_info->exec_domain->module); > > + if (tsk->binfmt) > > + module_put(tsk->binfmt->module); > > + > > + tsk->exit_code = -1; > > + tsk->exit_state = EXIT_DEAD; > > + > > + /* in release_task */ > > + atomic_dec(&tsk->user->processes); > > + write_lock_irq(&tasklist_lock); > > + __exit_signal(tsk); > > + __exit_sighand(tsk); > > + write_unlock_irq(&tasklist_lock); > > + release_thread(tsk); > > + put_task_struct(tsk); > > + > > + tsk->flags |= PF_DEAD; > > +#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA > > + mpol_free(tsk->mempolicy); > > + tsk->mempolicy = NULL; > > +#endif > > +} > > +#endif > > I don't understand why this is needed at all. It looks like a fair > amount of code from do_exit is being duplicated here. Yes, exactly. Someone who understand do_exit please help clean up the code. I'd like to remove the idle thread, since the smpboot code will create a new idle thread. > We've been > doing cpu removal on ppc64 logical partitions for a while and never > needed to do anything like this. Did it remove idle thread? or dead cpu is in a busy loop of idle? > Maybe idle_task_exit would suffice? idle_task_exit seems just drop mm. We need destroy the idle task for physical CPU hotplug, right? > > > > diff -puN kernel/sched.c~cpu_state_clean kernel/sched.c > > --- linux-2.6.11/kernel/sched.c~cpu_state_clean 2005-03-31 10:50:27.000000000 +0800 > > +++ linux-2.6.11-root/kernel/sched.c 2005-04-04 09:06:40.362357104 +0800 > > @@ -4028,6 +4028,58 @@ void __devinit init_idle(task_t *idle, i > > } > > > > /* > > + * Initial dummy domain for early boot and for hotplug cpu. Being static, > > + * it is initialized to zero, so all balancing flags are cleared which is > > + * what we want. > > + */ > > +static struct sched_domain sched_domain_dummy; > > + > > +#ifdef CONFIG_STR_SMP > > +static void __devinit exit_idle(int cpu) > > +{ > > + runqueue_t *rq = cpu_rq(cpu); > > + struct task_struct *p = rq->idle; > > + int j, k; > > + prio_array_t *array; > > + > > + /* init runqueue */ > > + spin_lock_init(&rq->lock); > > + rq->active = rq->arrays; > > + rq->expired = rq->arrays + 1; > > + rq->best_expired_prio = MAX_PRIO; > > + > > + rq->prev_mm = NULL; > > + rq->curr = rq->idle = NULL; > > + rq->expired_timestamp = 0; > > + > > + rq->sd = &sched_domain_dummy; > > + rq->cpu_load = 0; > > + rq->active_balance = 0; > > + rq->push_cpu = 0; > > + rq->migration_thread = NULL; > > + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&rq->migration_queue); > > + atomic_set(&rq->nr_iowait, 0); > > + > > + for (j = 0; j < 2; j++) { > > + array = rq->arrays + j; > > + for (k = 0; k < MAX_PRIO; k++) { > > + INIT_LIST_HEAD(array->queue + k); > > + __clear_bit(k, array->bitmap); > > + } > > + // delimiter for bitsearch > > + __set_bit(MAX_PRIO, array->bitmap); > > + } > > + /* Destroy IDLE thread. > > + * it's safe now, the CPU is in busy loop > > + */ > > + if (p->active_mm) > > + mmdrop(p->active_mm); > > + p->active_mm = NULL; > > + put_task_struct(p); > > +} > > +#endif > > + > > +/* > > * In a system that switches off the HZ timer nohz_cpu_mask > > * indicates which cpus entered this state. This is used > > * in the rcu update to wait only for active cpus. For system > > @@ -4432,6 +4484,9 @@ static int migration_call(struct notifie > > complete(&req->done); > > } > > spin_unlock_irq(&rq->lock); > > +#ifdef CONFIG_STR_SMP > > + exit_idle(cpu); > > +#endif > > I don't understand the need for this, either. The existing cpu > hotplug notifier in the scheduler takes care of initializing the sched > domains and groups appropriately for online/offline events; why do you > need to touch the runqueue structures? If a CPU is physically hotremoved from the system, shouldn't we clean its runqueue? Thanks, Shaohua ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <1112593338.4194.362.camel-U5EdaLXB8smDugQYiPIPGdh3ngVCH38I@public.gmane.org>]
* Re: Re: [RFC 5/6]clean cpu state after hotremove CPU [not found] ` <1112593338.4194.362.camel-U5EdaLXB8smDugQYiPIPGdh3ngVCH38I@public.gmane.org> @ 2005-04-04 15:33 ` Nathan Lynch 2005-04-04 22:14 ` Nigel Cunningham ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Nathan Lynch @ 2005-04-04 15:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Li Shaohua; +Cc: lkml, ACPI-DEV, Zwane Mwaikambo, Len Brown, Pavel Machek On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 01:42:18PM +0800, Li Shaohua wrote: > Hi, > On Mon, 2005-04-04 at 13:28, Nathan Lynch wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 10:07:02AM +0800, Li Shaohua wrote: > > > Clean up all CPU states including its runqueue and idle thread, > > > so we can use boot time code without any changes. > > > Note this makes /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpux/online unworkable. > > > > In what sense does it make the online attribute unworkable? > I removed the idle thread and other CPU states, and makes the dead CPU > into a 'halt' busy loop. > > > > > > diff -puN kernel/exit.c~cpu_state_clean kernel/exit.c > > > --- linux-2.6.11/kernel/exit.c~cpu_state_clean 2005-03-31 10:50:27.000000000 +0800 > > > +++ linux-2.6.11-root/kernel/exit.c 2005-03-31 10:50:27.000000000 +0800 > > > @@ -845,6 +845,65 @@ fastcall NORET_TYPE void do_exit(long co > > > for (;;) ; > > > } > > > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_STR_SMP > > > +void do_exit_idle(void) > > > +{ > > > + struct task_struct *tsk = current; > > > + int group_dead; > > > + > > > + BUG_ON(tsk->pid); > > > + BUG_ON(tsk->mm); > > > + > > > + if (tsk->io_context) > > > + exit_io_context(); > > > + tsk->flags |= PF_EXITING; > > > + tsk->it_virt_expires = cputime_zero; > > > + tsk->it_prof_expires = cputime_zero; > > > + tsk->it_sched_expires = 0; > > > + > > > + acct_update_integrals(tsk); > > > + update_mem_hiwater(tsk); > > > + group_dead = atomic_dec_and_test(&tsk->signal->live); > > > + if (group_dead) { > > > + del_timer_sync(&tsk->signal->real_timer); > > > + acct_process(-1); > > > + } > > > + exit_mm(tsk); > > > + > > > + exit_sem(tsk); > > > + __exit_files(tsk); > > > + __exit_fs(tsk); > > > + exit_namespace(tsk); > > > + exit_thread(); > > > + exit_keys(tsk); > > > + > > > + if (group_dead && tsk->signal->leader) > > > + disassociate_ctty(1); > > > + > > > + module_put(tsk->thread_info->exec_domain->module); > > > + if (tsk->binfmt) > > > + module_put(tsk->binfmt->module); > > > + > > > + tsk->exit_code = -1; > > > + tsk->exit_state = EXIT_DEAD; > > > + > > > + /* in release_task */ > > > + atomic_dec(&tsk->user->processes); > > > + write_lock_irq(&tasklist_lock); > > > + __exit_signal(tsk); > > > + __exit_sighand(tsk); > > > + write_unlock_irq(&tasklist_lock); > > > + release_thread(tsk); > > > + put_task_struct(tsk); > > > + > > > + tsk->flags |= PF_DEAD; > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA > > > + mpol_free(tsk->mempolicy); > > > + tsk->mempolicy = NULL; > > > +#endif > > > +} > > > +#endif > > > > I don't understand why this is needed at all. It looks like a fair > > amount of code from do_exit is being duplicated here. > Yes, exactly. Someone who understand do_exit please help clean up the > code. I'd like to remove the idle thread, since the smpboot code will > create a new idle thread. I'd say fix the smpboot code so that it doesn't create new idle tasks except during boot. > > > We've been > > doing cpu removal on ppc64 logical partitions for a while and never > > needed to do anything like this. > Did it remove idle thread? or dead cpu is in a busy loop of idle? Neither. The cpu is definitely offline, but there is no reason to free the idle thread. > > > Maybe idle_task_exit would suffice? > idle_task_exit seems just drop mm. We need destroy the idle task for > physical CPU hotplug, right? No. > > > > I don't understand the need for this, either. The existing cpu > > hotplug notifier in the scheduler takes care of initializing the sched > > domains and groups appropriately for online/offline events; why do you > > need to touch the runqueue structures? > If a CPU is physically hotremoved from the system, shouldn't we clean > its runqueue? No. It should make zero difference to the scheduler whether the "play dead" cpu hotplug or "physical" hotplug is being used. Nathan ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: Re: [RFC 5/6]clean cpu state after hotremove CPU 2005-04-04 15:33 ` Nathan Lynch @ 2005-04-04 22:14 ` Nigel Cunningham [not found] ` <1112652864.3757.31.camel-r49W/1Cwd2ff0s6lnCXPX/uOuaPYTxhvJwvTLr3MMZM@public.gmane.org> 2005-04-05 1:55 ` Li Shaohua 2005-04-05 9:00 ` Li Shaohua 2 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Nigel Cunningham @ 2005-04-04 22:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Nathan Lynch Cc: Li Shaohua, lkml, ACPI List, Zwane Mwaikambo, Len Brown, Pavel Machek Hi. On Tue, 2005-04-05 at 01:33, Nathan Lynch wrote: > > Yes, exactly. Someone who understand do_exit please help clean up the > > code. I'd like to remove the idle thread, since the smpboot code will > > create a new idle thread. > > I'd say fix the smpboot code so that it doesn't create new idle tasks > except during boot. Would that mean that CPUs that were physically hotplugged wouldn't get idle threads? Regards, Nigel -- Nigel Cunningham Software Engineer, Canberra, Australia http://www.cyclades.com Bus: +61 (2) 6291 9554; Hme: +61 (2) 6292 8028; Mob: +61 (417) 100 574 Maintainer of Suspend2 Kernel Patches http://suspend2.net ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <1112652864.3757.31.camel-r49W/1Cwd2ff0s6lnCXPX/uOuaPYTxhvJwvTLr3MMZM@public.gmane.org>]
* Re: Re: [RFC 5/6]clean cpu state after hotremove CPU [not found] ` <1112652864.3757.31.camel-r49W/1Cwd2ff0s6lnCXPX/uOuaPYTxhvJwvTLr3MMZM@public.gmane.org> @ 2005-04-04 22:46 ` Nathan Lynch 2005-04-04 22:56 ` [ACPI] " Nigel Cunningham 2005-04-04 22:56 ` Ashok Raj 0 siblings, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Nathan Lynch @ 2005-04-04 22:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Nigel Cunningham Cc: Li Shaohua, lkml, ACPI List, Zwane Mwaikambo, Len Brown, Pavel Machek Hi Nigel! On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 08:14:25AM +1000, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > On Tue, 2005-04-05 at 01:33, Nathan Lynch wrote: > > > Yes, exactly. Someone who understand do_exit please help clean up the > > > code. I'd like to remove the idle thread, since the smpboot code will > > > create a new idle thread. > > > > I'd say fix the smpboot code so that it doesn't create new idle tasks > > except during boot. > > Would that mean that CPUs that were physically hotplugged wouldn't get > idle threads? No, that wouldn't work. I am saying that there's little to gain by adding all this complexity for destroying the idle tasks when it's fairly simple to create num_possible_cpus() - 1 idle tasks* to accommodate any additional cpus which may come along. This is what ppc64 does now, and it should be feasible on any architecture which supports cpu hotplug. Nathan * num_possible_cpus() - 1 because the idle task for the boot cpu is created in sched_init. ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [ACPI] Re: [RFC 5/6]clean cpu state after hotremove CPU 2005-04-04 22:46 ` Nathan Lynch @ 2005-04-04 22:56 ` Nigel Cunningham 2005-04-04 22:56 ` Ashok Raj 1 sibling, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Nigel Cunningham @ 2005-04-04 22:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Nathan Lynch Cc: Li Shaohua, lkml, ACPI List, Zwane Mwaikambo, Len Brown, Pavel Machek Hi. On Tue, 2005-04-05 at 08:46, Nathan Lynch wrote: > Hi Nigel! > > On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 08:14:25AM +1000, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2005-04-05 at 01:33, Nathan Lynch wrote: > > > > Yes, exactly. Someone who understand do_exit please help clean up the > > > > code. I'd like to remove the idle thread, since the smpboot code will > > > > create a new idle thread. > > > > > > I'd say fix the smpboot code so that it doesn't create new idle tasks > > > except during boot. > > > > Would that mean that CPUs that were physically hotplugged wouldn't get > > idle threads? > > No, that wouldn't work. I am saying that there's little to gain by > adding all this complexity for destroying the idle tasks when it's > fairly simple to create num_possible_cpus() - 1 idle tasks* to > accommodate any additional cpus which may come along. This is what > ppc64 does now, and it should be feasible on any architecture which > supports cpu hotplug. Ah. Ta. I was a little confused :> Nigel > * num_possible_cpus() - 1 because the idle task for the boot cpu is > created in sched_init. -- Nigel Cunningham Software Engineer, Canberra, Australia http://www.cyclades.com Bus: +61 (2) 6291 9554; Hme: +61 (2) 6292 8028; Mob: +61 (417) 100 574 Maintainer of Suspend2 Kernel Patches http://suspend2.net ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [ACPI] Re: [RFC 5/6]clean cpu state after hotremove CPU 2005-04-04 22:46 ` Nathan Lynch 2005-04-04 22:56 ` [ACPI] " Nigel Cunningham @ 2005-04-04 22:56 ` Ashok Raj 1 sibling, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Ashok Raj @ 2005-04-04 22:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Nathan Lynch Cc: Nigel Cunningham, Li, Shaohua, lkml, ACPI List, Zwane Mwaikambo, Brown, Len, Pavel Machek On Mon, Apr 04, 2005 at 03:46:20PM -0700, Nathan Lynch wrote: > > Hi Nigel! > > On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 08:14:25AM +1000, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2005-04-05 at 01:33, Nathan Lynch wrote: > > > > Yes, exactly. Someone who understand do_exit please help clean > > No, that wouldn't work. I am saying that there's little to gain by > adding all this complexity for destroying the idle tasks when it's > fairly simple to create num_possible_cpus() - 1 idle tasks* to > accommodate any additional cpus which may come along. This is what > ppc64 does now, and it should be feasible on any architecture which > supports cpu hotplug. > > Nathan > > * num_possible_cpus() - 1 because the idle task for the boot cpu is > created in sched_init. > In ia64 we create idle threads on demand if one is not available for the same logical cpu number, and re-used when the same logical cpu number is re-used. just a minor improvement, i also thought about idle exit, but wasnt worth anything in return. Cheers, ashok ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [ACPI] Re: [RFC 5/6]clean cpu state after hotremove CPU 2005-04-04 15:33 ` Nathan Lynch 2005-04-04 22:14 ` Nigel Cunningham @ 2005-04-05 1:55 ` Li Shaohua [not found] ` <1112666106.17861.62.camel-U5EdaLXB8smDugQYiPIPGdh3ngVCH38I@public.gmane.org> 2005-04-05 9:00 ` Li Shaohua 2 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Li Shaohua @ 2005-04-05 1:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Nathan Lynch; +Cc: lkml, ACPI-DEV, Zwane Mwaikambo, Len Brown, Pavel Machek Hi, On Mon, 2005-04-04 at 23:33, Nathan Lynch wrote: > > I'd say fix the smpboot code so that it doesn't create new idle tasks > except during boot. I'd like the the CPU hotremove case just likes the case that CPU isn't boot. A non-boot CPU hasn't a idle thread. But you may think it's not worthy doing. Anyway, I will keep the idle thread in a updated patch like what you said. > > > We've been > > > doing cpu removal on ppc64 logical partitions for a while and never > > > needed to do anything like this. > > Did it remove idle thread? or dead cpu is in a busy loop of idle? > > Neither. The cpu is definitely offline, but there is no reason to > free the idle thread. > > > > > > Maybe idle_task_exit would suffice? > > idle_task_exit seems just drop mm. We need destroy the idle task for > > physical CPU hotplug, right? > > No. > > > > > > > I don't understand the need for this, either. The existing cpu > > > hotplug notifier in the scheduler takes care of initializing the sched > > > domains and groups appropriately for online/offline events; why do you > > > need to touch the runqueue structures? > > If a CPU is physically hotremoved from the system, shouldn't we clean > > its runqueue? > > No. It should make zero difference to the scheduler whether the "play > dead" cpu hotplug or "physical" hotplug is being used. Keeping some fields like 'cpu_load' are meanless for a hotadded CPU to me. Just ignore them? Thanks, Shaohua ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <1112666106.17861.62.camel-U5EdaLXB8smDugQYiPIPGdh3ngVCH38I@public.gmane.org>]
* Re: Re: [RFC 5/6]clean cpu state after hotremove CPU [not found] ` <1112666106.17861.62.camel-U5EdaLXB8smDugQYiPIPGdh3ngVCH38I@public.gmane.org> @ 2005-04-06 4:28 ` Nathan Lynch 0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Nathan Lynch @ 2005-04-06 4:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Li Shaohua; +Cc: lkml, ACPI-DEV, Zwane Mwaikambo, Len Brown, Pavel Machek On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 09:55:06AM +0800, Li Shaohua wrote: > On Mon, 2005-04-04 at 23:33, Nathan Lynch wrote: > > No. It should make zero difference to the scheduler whether the "play > > dead" cpu hotplug or "physical" hotplug is being used. > Keeping some fields like 'cpu_load' are meanless for a hotadded CPU to > me. Just ignore them? Reinitializing such things during the CPU_UP_PREPARE case in migration_call should be sufficient, if it's not done already. Nathan ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: Re: [RFC 5/6]clean cpu state after hotremove CPU 2005-04-04 15:33 ` Nathan Lynch 2005-04-04 22:14 ` Nigel Cunningham 2005-04-05 1:55 ` Li Shaohua @ 2005-04-05 9:00 ` Li Shaohua 2 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Li Shaohua @ 2005-04-05 9:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Nathan Lynch; +Cc: lkml, ACPI-DEV, Zwane Mwaikambo, Len Brown, Pavel Machek On Mon, 2005-04-04 at 23:33, Nathan Lynch wrote: > > > > > > I don't understand why this is needed at all. It looks like a fair > > > amount of code from do_exit is being duplicated here. > > Yes, exactly. Someone who understand do_exit please help clean up the > > code. I'd like to remove the idle thread, since the smpboot code will > > create a new idle thread. > > I'd say fix the smpboot code so that it doesn't create new idle tasks > except during boot. I tried what you said. But I must use a ugly method to adjust idle->thread.esp (stack pointer in IA32). otherwise, the stack will soon overflow after several rounds of hotplug. I'll take close look at if other fields in thread_info cause problems. Did you reinitialize the idle's thread_info in ppc? I have no problem to do it in IA32, but is this a good approach? Creating a new idle thread for upcoming CPU looks more graceful to me. Thanks, Shaohua ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC 5/6]clean cpu state after hotremove CPU [not found] ` <1112580367.4194.344.camel-U5EdaLXB8smDugQYiPIPGdh3ngVCH38I@public.gmane.org> 2005-04-04 5:28 ` Nathan Lynch @ 2005-04-04 19:11 ` Zwane Mwaikambo 2005-04-05 1:06 ` Li Shaohua 1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Zwane Mwaikambo @ 2005-04-04 19:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Li Shaohua; +Cc: lkml, ACPI-DEV, Len Brown, Pavel Machek On Mon, 4 Apr 2005, Li Shaohua wrote: > Clean up all CPU states including its runqueue and idle thread, > so we can use boot time code without any changes. > Note this makes /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpux/online unworkable. > > #ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU > #include <asm/nmi.h> > + > +#ifdef CONFIG_STR_SMP > +extern void cpu_exit_clear(int); > +#endif Perhaps change that ifdef to denote something which clearly shows that its physical hotplug as we'll need this for other users too. > +#ifdef CONFIG_STR_SMP > +extern void do_exit_idle(void); > +extern void cpu_uninit(void); > +void cpu_exit_clear(int cpu) > +{ > + int sibling; > + cpucount --; Is that protected by the cpu_control semaphore? Thanks, Zwane ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC 5/6]clean cpu state after hotremove CPU 2005-04-04 19:11 ` Zwane Mwaikambo @ 2005-04-05 1:06 ` Li Shaohua 0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Li Shaohua @ 2005-04-05 1:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Zwane Mwaikambo; +Cc: lkml, ACPI-DEV, Len Brown, Pavel Machek On Tue, 2005-04-05 at 03:11, Zwane Mwaikambo wrote: > On Mon, 4 Apr 2005, Li Shaohua wrote: > > > Clean up all CPU states including its runqueue and idle thread, > > so we can use boot time code without any changes. > > Note this makes /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpux/online unworkable. > > > > #ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU > > #include <asm/nmi.h> > > + > > +#ifdef CONFIG_STR_SMP > > +extern void cpu_exit_clear(int); > > +#endif > > Perhaps change that ifdef to denote something which clearly shows that its > physical hotplug as we'll need this for other users too. Ok. > > +#ifdef CONFIG_STR_SMP > > +extern void do_exit_idle(void); > > +extern void cpu_uninit(void); > > +void cpu_exit_clear(int cpu) > > +{ > > + int sibling; > > + cpucount --; > > Is that protected by the cpu_control semaphore? cpu_exit_clear is called before the dead CPU ack CPU_DEAD, so it's finished before __cpu_die returns, which is protected by cpu_control. Maybe I should add comments for it. Thanks, Shaohua ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2005-04-06 4:28 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2005-04-04 2:07 [RFC 5/6]clean cpu state after hotremove CPU Li Shaohua
[not found] ` <1112580367.4194.344.camel-U5EdaLXB8smDugQYiPIPGdh3ngVCH38I@public.gmane.org>
2005-04-04 5:28 ` Nathan Lynch
2005-04-04 5:42 ` Li Shaohua
[not found] ` <1112593338.4194.362.camel-U5EdaLXB8smDugQYiPIPGdh3ngVCH38I@public.gmane.org>
2005-04-04 15:33 ` Nathan Lynch
2005-04-04 22:14 ` Nigel Cunningham
[not found] ` <1112652864.3757.31.camel-r49W/1Cwd2ff0s6lnCXPX/uOuaPYTxhvJwvTLr3MMZM@public.gmane.org>
2005-04-04 22:46 ` Nathan Lynch
2005-04-04 22:56 ` [ACPI] " Nigel Cunningham
2005-04-04 22:56 ` Ashok Raj
2005-04-05 1:55 ` Li Shaohua
[not found] ` <1112666106.17861.62.camel-U5EdaLXB8smDugQYiPIPGdh3ngVCH38I@public.gmane.org>
2005-04-06 4:28 ` Nathan Lynch
2005-04-05 9:00 ` Li Shaohua
2005-04-04 19:11 ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2005-04-05 1:06 ` Li Shaohua
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox