From: Brian King <brking@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] powerpc: Clear cpu_sibling_map in cpu_die
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 16:40:49 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C743C61.8060906@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1282627487.22370.508.camel@pasglop>
On 08/24/2010 12:24 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-08-11 at 15:34 -0500, Brian King wrote:
>> While testing CPU DLPAR, the following problem was discovered.
>> We were DLPAR removing the first CPU, which in this case was
>> logical CPUs 0-3. CPUs 0-2 were already marked offline and
>> we were in the process of offlining CPU 3. After marking
>> the CPU inactive and offline in cpu_disable, but before the
>> cpu was completely idle (cpu_die), we ended up in __make_request
>> on CPU 3. There we looked at the topology map to see which CPU
>> to complete the I/O on and found no CPUs in the cpu_sibling_map.
>> This resulted in the block layer setting the completion cpu
>> to be NR_CPUS, which then caused an oops when we tried to
>> complete the I/O.
>>
>> Fix this by delaying clearing the sibling map of the cpu we
>> are offlining for the cpu we are offlining until cpu_die.
>
> So I'm not getting a clear mental picture of the situation, sorry about
> that.
>
> We are offlining CPU 3, and we have already marked it inactive and
> online, so how come we end up in __make_request() on it at this stage
I'm not sure about that. My thought was that until we get into cpu_die,
the cpu could still be executing code.
> and shouldn't it be the block layer that notices that it's targeting an
> offlined CPU ?
It could be easily fixed in blk_cpu_to_group as well. I'll look into
this.
> IE. I have doubts about leaving a CPU in the sibling map which isn't
> online... Wouldn't we end up "scheduling" things to it after it's
> supposed to have freed itself of everything (timers, workqueues,
> etc...) ?
I was assuming this wouldn't happen since the cpu is no longer online.
Thanks,
Brian
>
> As I said, I'm probably missing a part of the puzzle ..
>
> Ben.
>
>> Signed-off-by: Brian King <brking@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> ---
>>
>> arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c | 9 +++++++--
>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff -puN arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c~powerpc_sibling_map_offline arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c
>> --- linux-2.6/arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c~powerpc_sibling_map_offline 2010-08-09 16:49:47.000000000 -0500
>> +++ linux-2.6-bjking1/arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c 2010-08-09 16:49:47.000000000 -0500
>> @@ -598,8 +598,11 @@ int __cpu_disable(void)
>> /* Update sibling maps */
>> base = cpu_first_thread_in_core(cpu);
>> for (i = 0; i < threads_per_core; i++) {
>> - cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, cpu_sibling_mask(base + i));
>> - cpumask_clear_cpu(base + i, cpu_sibling_mask(cpu));
>> + if ((base + i) != cpu) {
>> + cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, cpu_sibling_mask(base + i));
>> + cpumask_clear_cpu(base + i, cpu_sibling_mask(cpu));
>> + }
>> +
>> cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, cpu_core_mask(base + i));
>> cpumask_clear_cpu(base + i, cpu_core_mask(cpu));
>> }
>> @@ -641,6 +644,8 @@ void cpu_hotplug_driver_unlock()
>>
>> void cpu_die(void)
>> {
>> + cpumask_clear_cpu(smp_processor_id(), cpu_sibling_mask(smp_processor_id()));
>> +
>> if (ppc_md.cpu_die)
>> ppc_md.cpu_die();
>> }
>> _
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linuxppc-dev mailing list
> Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
> https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
--
Brian King
Linux on Power Virtualization
IBM Linux Technology Center
prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-08-24 21:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-08-11 20:34 [PATCH 1/1] powerpc: Clear cpu_sibling_map in cpu_die Brian King
2010-08-24 5:24 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2010-08-24 21:40 ` Brian King [this message]
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=4C743C61.8060906@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=brking@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.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).