From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
To: Nathan Fontenot <nfont@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
John Allen <jallen@linux.ibm.com>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Cc: desnesn@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] powerpc/pseries: Wait for completion of hotplug events during PRRN handling
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2018 21:47:03 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <878t5e8mvc.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5a15ca87-74ae-171f-1506-b0bc5cee11bc@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Hi Nathan,
Nathan Fontenot <nfont@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:
> On 08/08/2018 10:29 AM, John Allen wrote:
>> While handling PRRN events, the time to handle the actual hotplug events
>> dwarfs the time it takes to perform the device tree updates and queue the
>> hotplug events. In the case that PRRN events are being queued continuously,
>> hotplug events have been observed to be queued faster than the kernel can
>> actually handle them. This patch avoids the problem by waiting for a
>> hotplug request to complete before queueing more hotplug events.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: John Allen <jallen@linux.ibm.com>
>
> In the V2 thread it was mentioned that we could just call the DLPAR operation
> directly instead of going through the workqueue. I have written a patch to do
> this that also cleans up some of the request handling.
>
> requests that come through the hotplug interrupt still use the workqueue. The
> other requests, PRRN and sysfs, just call the dlpar handler directly. This
> eliminates the need for a wait conditional and return code handling in the
> workqueue handler and should solve the issue that John solves with his patch.
>
> This still needs testing but wanted to get people's thoughts.
It looks great to me.
I guess I thought we'd need to add a lock, but I think you're right that
the existing device hotplug lock will work.
So if this survives a bit of testing then I'd love to merge it.
cheers
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-10 11:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-08 15:29 [PATCH v3 0/2] powerpc/pseries: Improve serialization of PRRN events John Allen
2018-08-08 15:29 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] powerpc/pseries: Avoid blocking rtas polling handling multiple " John Allen
2018-08-10 11:53 ` Michael Ellerman
2018-08-08 15:29 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] powerpc/pseries: Wait for completion of hotplug events during PRRN handling John Allen
2018-08-09 16:15 ` Nathan Fontenot
2018-08-10 11:47 ` Michael Ellerman [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=878t5e8mvc.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au \
--to=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=desnesn@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=jallen@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=nfont@linux.vnet.ibm.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).