From: Aravind Gopalakrishnan <aravind.gopalakrishnan@amd.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] speeding up cpu_up()
Date: Fri, 1 May 2015 19:42:52 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55441D8C.2080509@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150501224729.GN10239@pd.tnic>
On 5/1/15 5:47 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Fri, May 01, 2015 at 02:42:39PM -0700, Len Brown wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 12:15 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>>> So instead of playing games with an ancient delay, I'd suggest we
>>> install the 10 msec INIT assertion wait as a platform quirk instead,
>>> and activate it for all CPUs/systems that we think might need it, with
>>> a sufficiently robust and future-proof quirk cutoff condition.
>>>
>>> New systems won't have the quirk active and thus won't have to have
>>> this delay configurable either.
>> Okay, at this time, I think the quirk would apply to:
>>
>> 1. Intel family 5 (original pentium) -- some may actually need the quirk
>> 2. Intel family F (pentium4) -- mostly b/c I don't want to bother
>> finding/testing p4
>> 3. All AMD (happy to narrow down, if somebody can speak for AMD)
> Aravind and I could probably test on a couple of AMD boxes to narrow down.
>
> @Aravind, see here:
>
> https://lkml.kernel.org/r/87d69aab88c14d65ae1e7be55050d1b689b59b4b.1429402494.git.len.brown@intel.com
>
> You could ask around whether a timeout is needed between the assertion
> and deassertion of INIT done by the BSP when booting other cores.
Sure, I'll ask around and try mdelay(0) on some systems as well.
I can gather Fam15h, Fam16h but don't have K8's or older.
Will let you know how it goes.
-Aravind.
> If not, we probably should convert, at least modern AMD machines, to the
> no-delay default.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-05-02 0:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-19 0:53 [PATCH 0/1] speeding up cpu_up() Len Brown
2015-04-19 0:53 ` [PATCH 1/1] x86: replace cpu_up hard-coded mdelay with variable Len Brown
2015-04-20 7:13 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-04-20 12:37 ` Brown, Len
2015-04-20 17:45 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-04-22 5:40 ` Paul Gortmaker
2015-04-22 6:07 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-05-01 21:02 ` Len Brown
2015-04-20 7:15 ` [PATCH 0/1] speeding up cpu_up() Ingo Molnar
2015-05-01 21:42 ` Len Brown
2015-05-01 22:47 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-05-02 0:42 ` Aravind Gopalakrishnan [this message]
2015-05-03 16:13 ` Aravind Gopalakrishnan
2015-05-04 22:45 ` Aravind Gopalakrishnan
2015-05-05 7:15 ` Borislav Petkov
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=55441D8C.2080509@amd.com \
--to=aravind.gopalakrishnan@amd.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.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).