linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave.Martin@arm.com (Dave Martin)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 01/13] ARM: suspend: use hash of cpu_logical_map value to index into save array
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 16:45:34 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130726154534.GE2282@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.03.1307261139370.15022@syhkavp.arg>

On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 11:43:34AM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Jul 2013, Dave Martin wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 10:41:38AM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > > On Fri, 26 Jul 2013, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 05:06:51PM +0100, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, 25 Jul 2013, Dave Martin wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 02:55:00PM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wed, 24 Jul 2013, Dave Martin wrote:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > But this patch commits us to requiring that on the suspend path 
> > > > > > > > specifically -- I think that ought to be mentioned somewhere. A 
> > > > > > > > comment in the preamble for __cpu_suspend would be enough, I think.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > What comment would you suggest?  I want to make sure the possible 
> > > > > > > confusion you see is properly addressed.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I think we just need to state that the value of
> > > > > > cpu_logical_map(smp_processor_id()) must be the MPIDR of the physical
> > > > > > CPU the suspending logical CPU will resume on.  Consequently, if doing a
> > > > > > migration, cpu_logical_map() must be updated appropriately somewhere
> > > > > > between cpu_pm_enter() and cpu_suspend().
> > > > > 
> > > > > Excellent.  I've amended the patch with this:
> > > > > 
> > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/suspend.c b/arch/arm/kernel/suspend.c
> > > > > index 2835d35234..caf938db62 100644
> > > > > --- a/arch/arm/kernel/suspend.c
> > > > > +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/suspend.c
> > > > > @@ -17,6 +17,11 @@ extern void cpu_resume_mmu(void);
> > > > >  /*
> > > > >   * Hide the first two arguments to __cpu_suspend - these are an implementation
> > > > >   * detail which platform code shouldn't have to know about.
> > > > > + *
> > > > > + * On SMP systems, the value of cpu_logical_map(smp_processor_id()) must be
> > > > > + * the MPIDR of the physical CPU the suspending logical CPU will resume on.
> > > > > + * Consequently, if doing a physical CPU migration, cpu_logical_map() must be
> > > > > + * updated appropriately somewhere between cpu_pm_enter() and cpu_suspend().
> > > > >   */
> > > > >  int cpu_suspend(unsigned long arg, int (*fn)(unsigned long))
> > > > >  {
> > > > > 
> > > > > I've put it against cpu_suspend() rather than __cpu_suspend(() as this 
> > > > > is what users should care about.
> > > > > 
> > > > > ACK?
> > > > 
> > > > We need this patch to allow IKS to store a cpu context at a specific
> > > > index, let's be honest. It is a moot point and I am not very happy
> > > > about changing this code for a very specific usage, but the way code is
> > > > implemented makes the change acceptable. I really do not think we should
> > > > write guidelines on how cpu_suspend users have to change cpu_logical_map
> > > > though, that's not needed apart from IKS and that should be limited to IKS
> > > > code only.
> > > > 
> > > > Again, that's just my opinion, but cpu_suspend API must be kept as it is
> > > > and we should not encourage people to use it in creative ways.
> > > 
> > > I tend to agree, but I'm now stuck between two conflicting requests.
> > 
> > Would it make sense to keep the same API to cpu_suspend(), but make it
> > a wrapper for another function which has the MPIDR argument?  Then people
> > calling cpu_suspend() continue as normal.  Only IKS needs to know about
> > the underlying MPIDR handling when calling this.
> 
> The fact is that the switcher _does_ need to swizzle the cpu_logical_map 
> anyway before suspending.  Hence really there is no point creating extra
> wrappers for this.
> 
> So Lorenzo's suggestion to simply not advertise this too much for people 
> to not get too creative is probably the best compromize IMHO.

Sure, I don't have a problem with that in light of the discussion.

Cheers
---Dave

  reply	other threads:[~2013-07-26 15:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-07-23  3:31 [PATCH 00/13] The big.LITTLE In-Kernel Switcher (IKS), part 1 Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-23  3:31 ` [PATCH 01/13] ARM: suspend: use hash of cpu_logical_map value to index into save array Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-24 16:47   ` Dave Martin
2013-07-24 18:55     ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-25 10:55       ` Dave Martin
2013-07-25 16:06         ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-26 11:31           ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2013-07-26 14:41             ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-26 15:34               ` Dave Martin
2013-07-26 15:43                 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-26 15:45                   ` Dave Martin [this message]
2013-07-26 17:04                   ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2013-07-26 19:19                     ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-29 11:50   ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2013-07-30  2:08     ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-30  9:15       ` Dave Martin
2013-07-23  3:31 ` [PATCH 02/13] ARM: gic: add CPU migration support Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-25 11:44   ` Jonathan Austin
2013-07-25 19:11     ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-23  3:31 ` [PATCH 03/13] ARM: b.L: core switcher code Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-25 17:15   ` Jonathan Austin
2013-07-25 20:20     ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-26 10:45   ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2013-07-26 14:29     ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-26 14:53   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-07-26 15:10     ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-23  3:31 ` [PATCH 04/13] ARM: bL_switcher: add clockevent save/restore support Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-23  3:31 ` [PATCH 05/13] ARM: bL_switcher: move to dedicated threads rather than workqueues Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-26 15:18   ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2013-07-26 15:39     ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-23  3:31 ` [PATCH 06/13] ARM: bL_switcher: simplify stack isolation Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-23  3:31 ` [PATCH 07/13] ARM: bL_switcher: hot-unplug half of the available CPUs Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-23  3:31 ` [PATCH 08/13] ARM: bL_switcher: do not hardcode GIC IDs in the code Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-23  3:31 ` [PATCH 09/13] ARM: bL_switcher: ability to enable and disable the switcher via sysfs Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-23  3:31 ` [PATCH 10/13] ARM: bL_switcher: add kernel cmdline param to disable the switcher on boot Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-23  3:31 ` [PATCH 11/13] ARM: bL_switcher: veto CPU hotplug requests when the switcher is active Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-31 10:30   ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2013-08-05  4:25     ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-23  3:31 ` [PATCH 12/13] ARM: bL_switcher: remove assumptions between logical and physical CPUs Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-30 16:30   ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2013-07-30 19:15     ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-31  9:41       ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2013-07-23  3:31 ` [PATCH 13/13] ARM: bL_switcher: add a simple /dev user interface for debugging purposes Nicolas Pitre

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=20130726154534.GE2282@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=dave.martin@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).