From: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
To: Anirban Sinha <ASinha@zeugmasystems.com>
Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org
Subject: Re: stop_this_cpu - redundant code?
Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2008 13:43:59 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081018124358.GC17322@linux-mips.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DDFD17CC94A9BD49A82147DDF7D545C50130734A@exchange.ZeugmaSystems.local>
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 07:57:12PM -0700, Anirban Sinha wrote:
> This function (stop_this_cpu) in /arch/mips/kernel/smp.c does a
> local_irq_enable() and the adjacent comment says that it's because it
> may need to service _machine_restart IPI. Unfortunately,
> smp_call_function only sends IPIs to cores that are still online ( it
> uses the cpu_online_map U all_but_myself_map in
> smp_call_function_map()).
Usually a system would be restarted through some hardware mechanism -
probably a reset - anyway.
> So the bottom-line is, should we still keep the local irqs enabled or is
> this code totally redundant? I have seen other similar functions in
> other archs where they actually disable the local irqs.
You're right. The code is ancient old and once uppon a time it made sense
to do things this way but the MIPS version was never updates. Stop_this_cpu
also should try to minimize the power consumption by using the WAIT
instruction or whatever else a particular process has to offer.
I didn't try to optimize this for the 34K where a TC could try to halt
itself - there isn't really a point, I think.
A few other architectures are explicitly disabling interrupts but that's
also redundant because smp_call_function() invokes the function on other
processors with interrupts disabled.
Thanks for posting this,
Ralf
Signed-off-by: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
diff --git a/arch/mips/kernel/smp.c b/arch/mips/kernel/smp.c
index 7b59cfb..b79ea70 100644
--- a/arch/mips/kernel/smp.c
+++ b/arch/mips/kernel/smp.c
@@ -163,8 +163,10 @@ static void stop_this_cpu(void *dummy)
* Remove this CPU:
*/
cpu_clear(smp_processor_id(), cpu_online_map);
- local_irq_enable(); /* May need to service _machine_restart IPI */
- for (;;); /* Wait if available. */
+ for (;;) {
+ if (cpu_wait)
+ (*cpu_wait)(); /* Wait if available. */
+ }
}
void smp_send_stop(void)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-10-18 12:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-10-18 2:57 stop_this_cpu - redundant code? Anirban Sinha
2008-10-18 2:57 ` Anirban Sinha
2008-10-18 12:43 ` Ralf Baechle [this message]
2008-10-20 19:05 ` panic logic defeats arch dependent code Anirban Sinha
2008-10-20 19:05 ` Anirban Sinha
2008-10-23 13:07 ` Ralf Baechle
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=20081018124358.GC17322@linux-mips.org \
--to=ralf@linux-mips.org \
--cc=ASinha@zeugmasystems.com \
--cc=linux-mips@linux-mips.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