[PATCH v15 17/20] arm64: kdump: implement machine_crash_shutdown()

[takahiro.akashi@linaro.org (AKASHI Takahiro)]

On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 11:10:38AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 09:12:32AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > On 31/03/16 08:57, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 01:29:28PM +0000, James Morse wrote:
> > >> On 18/03/16 18:08, James Morse wrote:
> > >>> On 14/03/16 17:48, Geoff Levand wrote:
> > >>>> +	/* just in case */
> > >>>> +	while (1)
> > >>>> +		wfi();
> > >>
> > >> Having thought about this some more: I don't think spinning like this is safe.
> > >> We need to spin with the MMU turned off, otherwise this core will pollute the
> > >> kdump kernel with TLB entries from the old page tables.
> > > 
> > > I think that wfi() will never wake up since local interrupts are disabled
> > > here. So how can it pollute the kdump kernel?
> > 
> > Having interrupts disabled doesn't prevent an exit from WFI. Quite the
> > opposite, actually. It is designed to wake-up the core when something
> > happens on the external interface.
> 
> Further, WFI is a hint, and may simply act as a NOP. 

Ah, OK. But even so, none of interrupt handlers (nor other code) will be
executed after cpu wakes up, and the memory won't be polluted.
Or do I still miss something?

-Takahiro AKASHI
 
> The ARM ARM calls this out (see "D1.17.2" Wait For Interrupt in ARM DDI
> 0487A.i):
> 
> 	Because the architecture permits a PE to leave the low-power
> 	state for any reason, it is permissible for a PE to treat WFI as
> 	a NOP , but this is not recommended for lowest power operation.
> 
> Thanks,
> Mark.

-- 
Thanks,
-Takahiro AKASHI