From: Brian King <brking@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: michael@ellerman.id.au
Cc: Michael Neuling <mikey@neuling.org>, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] powerpc: Ignore IPIs to offline CPUs
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 08:50:19 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BCF029B.1020805@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1271856929.3832.46.camel@concordia>
On 04/21/2010 08:35 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 22:15 -0500, Brian King wrote:
>> On 04/20/2010 09:04 PM, Michael Neuling wrote:
>>> In message <201004210154.o3L1sXaR001791@d01av04.pok.ibm.com> you wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Since there is nothing to stop an IPI from occurring to an
>>>> offline CPU, rather than printing a warning to the logs,
>>>> just ignore the IPI. This was seen while stress testing
>>>> SMT enable/disable.
>>>
>>> This seems like a recipe for disaster. Do we at least need a
>>> WARN_ON_ONCE?
>>
>> Actually we are only seeing it once per offlining of a CPU,
>> and only once in a while.
>>
>> My guess is that once the CPU is marked offline fewer IPIs
>> get sent to it since its no longer in the online mask.
>
> Hmm, right. Once it's offline it shouldn't get _any_ IPIs, AFAICS.
>
>> Perhaps we should be disabling IPIs to offline CPUs instead?
>
> You mean not sending them? We do:
>
> void smp_xics_message_pass(int target, int msg)
> {
> unsigned int i;
>
> if (target < NR_CPUS) {
> smp_xics_do_message(target, msg);
> } else {
> for_each_online_cpu(i) {
> if (target == MSG_ALL_BUT_SELF
> && i == smp_processor_id())
> continue;
> smp_xics_do_message(i, msg);
> }
> }
> }
>
> So it does sound like the IPI was sent while the cpu was online (ie.
> before pseries_cpu_disable(), but xics_migrate_irqs_away() has not
> caused the IPI to be cancelled.
>
> Problem is I don't think we can just ignore the IPI. The IPI might have
> been sent for a smp_call_function() which is waiting for the result, in
> which case if we ignore it the caller will block for ever.
>
> I don't see how to fix it :/
Any objections to just removing the warning?
Thanks,
Brian
--
Brian King
Linux on Power Virtualization
IBM Linux Technology Center
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-21 13:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-04-21 1:54 [PATCH 1/1] powerpc: Ignore IPIs to offline CPUs Brian King
2010-04-21 2:04 ` Michael Neuling
2010-04-21 3:15 ` Brian King
2010-04-21 13:35 ` Michael Ellerman
2010-04-21 13:50 ` Brian King [this message]
2010-04-21 21:03 ` Michael Neuling
2010-04-21 22:15 ` Brian King
2010-04-21 22:49 ` Michael Neuling
2010-04-21 23:33 ` Brian King
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=4BCF029B.1020805@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=brking@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=michael@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=mikey@neuling.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).