linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: nyushchenko@dev.rtsoft.ru (Nikita Yushchenko)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC/PATCH] arm: do not skip SMP init calls on SMP_ON_UP case
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2015 14:13:29 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56598C59.4070307@dev.rtsoft.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151124153305.GD8644@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>

>> Not sure I understand logic behind this. With the current code,
>> resulting cpu_possible_mask depends on CONFIG_SMP_ON_UP:
>> - if it is set, cpu_possible_mask contains (0 1), as initialized in
>> arm_dt_init_cpu_maps()
>> - if it is not set, cpu_possible_mask contains (0), since
>> imx_smp_init_cpus() removes 1 from there.
> 
> Right, adding debug to arch/arm/kernel/setup.c, just before the
> "if (is_smp())" shows:
> 
> is_smp() 0 possible 3 present 1 online 1
> 
> which is totally wrong: if is_smp() is false, we should not be setting
> up any possible CPUs.  See a patch below to fix that.
> 
> However, this doesn't matter much, because the code in setup.c won't
> initialise the SMP operations struct ...

But cpu start code is not the only place in the kernel that uses cpu_present_mask.

Are you sure that running with invalid cpu_present_mask has no side effects?

> Here's the patch to fix the DT code, which should not be setting
> present CPUs when is_smp() is false.

I see that this fixes the issue as well.

But I still don't understand rationale behind all these is_smp() checks.
This makes init sequence different with and without CONFIG_SMP_ON_UP.
Isn't kernel intended to run ok without CONFIG_SMP_ON_UP?

And if yes - then why not run the same init sequence in both cases?

  reply	other threads:[~2015-11-28 11:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-11-23 11:59 [RFC/PATCH] arm: do not skip SMP init calls on SMP_ON_UP case nyushchenko at dev.rtsoft.ru
2015-11-23 12:03 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-11-23 12:06   ` Nikita Yushchenko
2015-11-23 12:12     ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-11-23 12:19       ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-11-23 12:46         ` Nikita Yushchenko
2015-11-23 12:32     ` Vladimir Murzin
2015-11-23 12:42       ` Nikita Yushchenko
2015-11-23 12:47         ` Nikita Yushchenko
2015-11-23 13:04           ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-11-24 14:52             ` Nikita Yushchenko
2015-11-24 15:05               ` Nikita Yushchenko
2015-11-24 15:28                 ` Nikita Yushchenko
2015-11-24 15:33               ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-11-28 11:13                 ` Nikita Yushchenko [this message]
2015-11-30  8:25                   ` Nikita Yushchenko

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=56598C59.4070307@dev.rtsoft.ru \
    --to=nyushchenko@dev.rtsoft.ru \
    --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).