linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC] Make SMP secondary CPU up more resilient to failure.
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 11:14:59 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110113111459.GC24149@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimLcGEDrexVCyMROYA1x_GsXdpx_6_ziYWVipMp@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 04:19:40AM -0600, Andrei Warkentin wrote:
> I fully agree. Would you be interested in me bringing back the actual
> synchronization code from platform-dependent code into the preinit
> function and posting that as a patch for review?

I really don't like the idea of a preinit function - it's completely
unnecessary as I've been trying to point out.  It has been shown that
it takes a hundred or so microseconds to get into the kernel, and
then a couple of hundred milliseconds to run the delay loop.

As platforms are expected to wait in their boot_secondary() for the
first half - currently platforms wait one second - we're talking
about around a hundred microseconds vs a timeout of one second.
That's a factor of 10000 beyond what's required.

It has also been shown that the problem you were seeing was down to
synchronization/delayed write bugs which have since been solved - and
adding yet more synchronization is not the answer to buggy
synchronization.

So, as the timeouts are already well in excess and the root cause of
your problem has been resolved, I see no need to make this stuff more
complex - the more complexity there is, the more chance there is of
things going wrong.

  reply	other threads:[~2011-01-13 11:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-12-15 23:45 [RFC] Make SMP secondary CPU up more resilient to failure Andrei Warkentin
2010-12-16 11:34 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-12-16 23:09   ` Andrei Warkentin
2010-12-16 23:28     ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-12-17 20:52       ` Andrei Warkentin
2010-12-17 23:14         ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-12-17 23:45           ` Andrei Warkentin
2010-12-18  0:08             ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-12-18  0:36               ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-12-18  7:17               ` Andrei Warkentin
2010-12-18 12:01                 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-12-18 12:10                   ` Andrei Warkentin
2010-12-18 20:04                     ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-12-21 21:53                       ` Andrei Warkentin
2010-12-24 17:38                         ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-13 10:19                           ` Andrei Warkentin
2011-01-13 11:14                             ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message]
2011-01-13 22:03                               ` Andrei Warkentin
2010-12-17  0:11     ` murali at embeddedwireless.com
2010-12-18  9:58     ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-12-18 11:54       ` Andrei Warkentin
2010-12-18 12:19         ` Russell King - ARM Linux

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=20110113111459.GC24149@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk \
    --to=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).