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?
next prev parent 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).