From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e35.co.us.ibm.com (e35.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.153]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "e35.co.us.ibm.com", Issuer "Equifax" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE182DDE19 for ; Sat, 1 Dec 2007 03:11:43 +1100 (EST) Received: from d03relay05.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay05.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.107]) by e35.co.us.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id lAUGBYHD011581 for ; Fri, 30 Nov 2007 11:11:34 -0500 Received: from d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (d03av03.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.169]) by d03relay05.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.7) with ESMTP id lAUGBWYS195998 for ; Fri, 30 Nov 2007 09:11:32 -0700 Received: from d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id lAUGBW3i011399 for ; Fri, 30 Nov 2007 09:11:32 -0700 Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc: fix os-term usage on kernel panic From: Will Schmidt To: Stephen Rothwell In-Reply-To: <20071130165651.b1b7c16c.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> References: <20071120012815.GB7969@austin.ibm.com> <1196208960.11297.26.camel@farscape.rchland.ibm.com> <20071130165651.b1b7c16c.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 10:11:32 -0600 Message-Id: <1196439093.11297.52.camel@farscape.rchland.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, paulus@samba.org Reply-To: will_schmidt@vnet.ibm.com List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, 2007-11-30 at 16:56 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 18:15:59 -0600 Will Schmidt wrote: > > > > (resending with the proper "from" addr this time). > > > > > > I'm seeing some funky behavior on power5/power6 partitions with this > > patch. A "/sbin/reboot" is now behaving much more like a > > "/sbin/halt". > > > > Anybody else seeing this, or is it time for me to call an exorcist for > > my boxes? > > On my Power5+ box, I get an error (code B200A101) logged every time I > reboot and about half the time, the machine does not reboot but need to > be power cycled. Removing the cited patch makes the error not by logged > and reboots work fine. > > Paul and I have been having a look at this and Paul has asked the > architects for clarification of when os-term should be used. The architects will have the correct answer of course. >>From my reading of the papr, I've got the impression that there are two possibilities. First, the os-term never returns, and it's up to the service processor to do whatever it's going to do. (call home, dump, something else). Nothing we can do there. Second, os-term returns, and it's up to the OS to call into power-off or system-reboot. I think this is more likely. I havn't followed the path back from machine_restart to see exactly how we got there, but probably means a bit more logic to decide whether to call into rtas_restart() or pSeries_power_off() after the call to machine_shutdown.