linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nathan Lynch <ntl@pobox.com>
To: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
Subject: __cpu_up vs. start_secondary race?
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2008 15:30:16 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081201213016.GC6829@localdomain> (raw)

Hi,

I think there may be a plausible issue here.  If not, maybe I'll get
an education :)

cpu_callin_map is used during secondary CPU bootstrap to notify the
waiting CPU that the new CPU is coming up.  __cpu_up clears
cpu_callin_map[cpu] and then polls the same location, waiting for
start_secondary to set it to 1.  But I'm wondering how safe the
current implementation is -- start_secondary doesn't have an explicit
sync following cpu_callin_map[cpu] = 1, and __cpu_up has no
synchronization instructions in its polling loop, so how can we be
sure that the waiting cpu will see the update to that location in
time?

Compare with the prom_hold_cpus/__secondary_hold_acknowledge code,
which is doing a very similar task, but it has the mb and sync (in
head_64.S at least) that seem to be missing from the case above.

Since we're not buried in "Processor X is stuck" bug reports, I must
be missing something, or there's some incidental factor that makes it
okay in practice...

Relevant code from arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c:

static volatile unsigned int cpu_callin_map[NR_CPUS];

....

int __cpuinit __cpu_up(unsigned int cpu)
{
        int c;

        secondary_ti = current_set[cpu];
        if (!cpu_enable(cpu))
                return 0;

        if (smp_ops == NULL ||
            (smp_ops->cpu_bootable && !smp_ops->cpu_bootable(cpu)))
                return -EINVAL;

        /* Make sure callin-map entry is 0 (can be leftover a CPU
         * hotplug
         */
        cpu_callin_map[cpu] = 0;

        /* The information for processor bringup must
         * be written out to main store before we release
         * the processor.
         */
        smp_mb();

        /* wake up cpus */
        DBG("smp: kicking cpu %d\n", cpu);
        smp_ops->kick_cpu(cpu);

        /*
         * wait to see if the cpu made a callin (is actually up).
         * use this value that I found through experimentation.
         * -- Cort
         */
        if (system_state < SYSTEM_RUNNING)
                for (c = 50000; c && !cpu_callin_map[cpu]; c--)
                        udelay(100);
#ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU
        else
                /*
                 * CPUs can take much longer to come up in the
                 * hotplug case.  Wait five seconds.
                 */
                for (c = 25; c && !cpu_callin_map[cpu]; c--) {
                        msleep(200);
                }
#endif

        if (!cpu_callin_map[cpu]) {
                printk("Processor %u is stuck.\n", cpu);
                return -ENOENT;
        }

        printk("Processor %u found.\n", cpu);

        if (smp_ops->give_timebase)
                smp_ops->give_timebase();

        /* Wait until cpu puts itself in the online map */
        while (!cpu_online(cpu))
                cpu_relax();

        return 0;
}
....

int __devinit start_secondary(void *unused)
{
        unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id();
        struct device_node *l2_cache;
        int i, base;

        atomic_inc(&init_mm.mm_count);
        current->active_mm = &init_mm;

        smp_store_cpu_info(cpu);
        set_dec(tb_ticks_per_jiffy);
        preempt_disable();
        cpu_callin_map[cpu] = 1;

        smp_ops->setup_cpu(cpu);
        if (smp_ops->take_timebase)
                smp_ops->take_timebase();
....

             reply	other threads:[~2008-12-01 21:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-12-01 21:30 Nathan Lynch [this message]
2008-12-01 22:08 ` __cpu_up vs. start_secondary race? Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-12-03  2:16   ` Nathan Lynch
2008-12-03  4:14     ` Trent Piepho
2008-12-03  4:52     ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-12-03  5:20       ` Nathan Lynch

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=20081201213016.GC6829@localdomain \
    --to=ntl@pobox.com \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.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).