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 --]
next prev 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