public inbox for linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Cc: thuth@redhat.com, borntraeger@de.ibm.com,
	linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, cohuck@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v3 4/9] s390x: smp: Rework cpu start and active tracking
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2020 15:47:16 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <22cbcc9d-1d32-a5c9-4f3f-7892e28bc705@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0f9984f0-9768-dba8-5e36-8e667bc05c88@redhat.com>


[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2127 bytes --]

On 1/20/20 1:06 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 17.01.20 11:46, Janosch Frank wrote:
>> The architecture specifies that processing sigp orders may be
>> asynchronous, and this is indeed the case on some hypervisors, so we
>> need to wait until the cpu runs before we return from the setup/start
>> function.
>>
>> As there was a lot of duplicate code, a common function for cpu
>> restarts has been introduced.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
>> ---
>>  lib/s390x/smp.c | 50 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
>>  1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/lib/s390x/smp.c b/lib/s390x/smp.c
>> index f57f420..84e681d 100644
>> --- a/lib/s390x/smp.c
>> +++ b/lib/s390x/smp.c
>> @@ -104,35 +104,46 @@ int smp_cpu_stop_store_status(uint16_t addr)
>>  	return rc;
>>  }
>>  
>> +static int smp_cpu_restart_nolock(uint16_t addr, struct psw *psw)
>> +{
>> +	int rc;
>> +	struct cpu *cpu = smp_cpu_from_addr(addr);
> 
> I'd exchange these two (reverse christmas tree)

Christmas is over

> 
>> +
>> +	if (!cpu)
>> +		return -1;
> 
> -EINVAL?
> 
>> +	if (psw) {
>> +		cpu->lowcore->restart_new_psw.mask = psw->mask;
>> +		cpu->lowcore->restart_new_psw.addr = psw->addr;
>> +	}
> 
> Does this make sense to have optional? (the other CPU will execute
> random crap if not set, won't it?)

Well, I have restarts in the smp test and I don't want to always pass a
psw if I know what the last restart psw was.
Simply restarting into test_func or wait_for_flag is certainly no problem.

> 
>> +	rc = sigp(addr, SIGP_RESTART, 0, NULL);
>> +	if (rc)
>> +		return rc;
>> +	/*
>> +	 * The order has been accepted, but the actual restart may not
>> +	 * have been performed yet, so wait until the cpu is running.
>> +	 */
>> +	while (!smp_cpu_running(addr))
>> +		mb();
> 
> Should you make sure to stop the CPU before issuing the restart?
> Otherwise you will get false positives if it is still running (but
> hasn't processed the RESTART yet)

Good point


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-01-20 14:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-01-17 10:46 [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v3 0/9] s390x: smp: Improve smp code and reset checks Janosch Frank
2020-01-17 10:46 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v3 1/9] s390x: smp: Cleanup smp.c Janosch Frank
2020-01-20 12:02   ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-17 10:46 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v3 2/9] s390x: smp: Only use smp_cpu_setup once Janosch Frank
2020-01-17 10:46 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v3 3/9] s390x: Add cpu id to interrupt error prints Janosch Frank
2020-01-17 10:46 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v3 4/9] s390x: smp: Rework cpu start and active tracking Janosch Frank
2020-01-20 12:06   ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-20 13:16     ` Thomas Huth
2020-01-20 13:20       ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-20 14:47     ` Janosch Frank [this message]
2020-01-20 14:53       ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-17 10:46 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v3 5/9] s390x: smp: Wait for cpu setup to finish Janosch Frank
2020-01-20 11:04   ` Cornelia Huck
2020-01-20 12:07   ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-17 10:46 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v3 6/9] s390x: smp: Loop if secondary cpu returns into cpu setup again Janosch Frank
2020-01-20 11:27   ` Cornelia Huck
2020-01-20 12:07     ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-17 10:46 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v3 7/9] s390x: smp: Remove unneeded cpu loops Janosch Frank
2020-01-20 11:29   ` Cornelia Huck
2020-01-20 14:41     ` Janosch Frank
2020-01-20 16:11       ` Cornelia Huck
2020-01-21 12:46         ` Janosch Frank
2020-01-21 12:59           ` Cornelia Huck
2020-01-21 13:07             ` Janosch Frank
2020-01-17 10:46 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v3 8/9] s390x: smp: Test all CRs on initial reset Janosch Frank
2020-01-20 11:44   ` Cornelia Huck
2020-01-20 12:10   ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-20 14:49     ` Janosch Frank
2020-01-20 14:53       ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-17 10:46 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v3 9/9] s390x: smp: Dirty fpc before initial reset test Janosch Frank

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=22cbcc9d-1d32-a5c9-4f3f-7892e28bc705@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=thuth@redhat.com \
    /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