From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] ARM: tegra: disable nonboot CPUs when reboot
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2013 19:18:46 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130607181846.GL8111@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51B20DF1.3030207@wwwdotorg.org>
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 05:44:33PM +0100, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 06/07/2013 03:36 AM, Joseph Lo wrote:
> > The normal CPU hotplug flow in kernel and the flow for Tegra we expected,
> > is checking the CPU ID is OK for hotplug by "tegra_cpu_disable", the CPU
> > that would be hotplugged runs into a power-gate state by "tegra_cpu_die",
> > then the other CPU waits for the CPU that was hotplugged in reset and
> > clock gate it by "tegra_cpu_kill". That means we don't support the CPU
> > being stopped or put into offline by trigger "tegra_cpu_kill" directly.
> > It may cause a busy loop for waiting CPU in reset.
> >
> > After the commit "62e930e reboot: rigrate shutdown/reboot to boot cpu",
> > we remove "disable_nonboot_cpus" when kernel_{restart,halt,power_off}.
> > But the ARM kernel trigger "send_smp_stop" when machine_shutdown, that
> > would cause the "tegra_cpu_kill" directly without "tegra_cpu_die" first.
> >
> > We hook "disable_nonboot_cpus" in "reboot_notifier" to avoid that happens.
> > And it can work for reboot, shutdown, halt and kexec.
>
> I don't believe this is the correct solution.
>
> If the semantics of cpu_kill/cpu_die are such that it's legal to call
> only cpu_kill without having cause cpu_die to run on the killed CPU
> first, then Tegra's implementation is buggy. We should simply fix that,
> rather than avoiding this by forcing a different order for the calls to
> cpu_kill/cpu_die.
>
> If the semantics of cpu_kill/cpu_die are such that one /must/ cause
> cpu_die to run on the killed CPU before cpu_kill can be used on it, then
> there's a bug in the code that isn't doing that.
>
> I'm CCing a few people in an attempt to find out exactly what the
> expected semantics are for cpu_kill/cpu_die; is it legal to call
> cpu_kill without having first caused cpu_die to execute?
By cpu_kill, do you mean platform_cpu_kill called from __cpu_die? If so,
__cpu_die and cpu_die are definitely supposed to be treated as a pair, since
they synchronise via the cpu_died completion.
Will
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-07 18:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-07 9:36 [PATCH] ARM: tegra: disable nonboot CPUs when reboot Joseph Lo
2013-06-07 16:44 ` Stephen Warren
2013-06-07 18:18 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2013-06-07 18:56 ` Stephen Warren
2013-06-07 21:28 ` Stephen Warren
2013-06-07 22:15 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-06-07 22:39 ` Stephen Warren
2013-06-07 22:55 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-06-10 14:42 ` Will Deacon
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=20130607181846.GL8111@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com \
--to=will.deacon@arm.com \
--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).