From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
To: Mark Lord <lkml@rtr.ca>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 0/2] suspend/resume regression fixes
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 23:40:22 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200709282340.23730.rjw@sisk.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <46FD6F83.8070801@rtr.ca>
On Friday, 28 September 2007 23:17, Mark Lord wrote:
> Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Fri, 2007-09-28 at 16:27 -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
> ..
> >> On a closely related note: I just now submitted a patch to fix SMP-poweroff,
> >> by having it do disable_nonboot_cpus before doing poweroff.
> >>
> >> Which has led me to thinking..
> >> ..are similar precautions perhaps necessary for *all* ACPI BIOS calls?
> >>
> >> Because one never knows what the other CPUs are doing at the same time,
> >> and what the side effects may be on the ACPI BIOS functions.
> >>
> >> And also, I wonder if at a minimum we should be guaranteeing ACPI BIOS calls
> >> only ever happen from CPU#0 (or the "boot" CPU)? Or do we do that already?
> >
> > The ACPI calls are serialized in the kernel, AFAICT. But the fragile
> > situations (suspend, resume, shutdown, reboot) are probably those, where
> > some BIOS implementation expect that certain things are not called or
> > not active.
>
> Mmm.. *do* we actually do this for reboot? I don't see it there.
> And how about for kexec?
>
> I'm probably just missing seeing it. Right?
Nope.
Till now, only hibernation and suspend disabled the nonboot CPUs before
invoking the platform firmware.
Greetings,
Rafael
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-09-28 21:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-09-22 22:29 [patch 0/2] suspend/resume regression fixes Thomas Gleixner
2007-09-22 22:29 ` [patch 1/2] ACPI: disable lower idle C-states across suspend/resume Thomas Gleixner
2007-10-01 10:11 ` Andi Kleen
2007-09-22 22:29 ` [patch 2/2] clockevents: remove the suspend/resume workaround^Wthinko Thomas Gleixner
2007-09-22 22:59 ` [patch 0/2] suspend/resume regression fixes Linus Torvalds
2007-09-22 23:30 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-09-23 1:20 ` Oleg Verych
2007-09-23 3:11 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-09-23 5:24 ` Mihai Donțu
2007-09-23 12:30 ` Alan Cox
2007-09-23 13:00 ` Mihai Donțu
2007-09-23 14:06 ` Matthew Garrett
2007-09-23 10:29 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-09-28 20:27 ` Mark Lord
2007-09-28 20:33 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-09-28 21:17 ` Mark Lord
2007-09-28 21:40 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2007-09-28 21:04 ` Alan Cox
2007-09-29 17:12 ` Bill Davidsen
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=200709282340.23730.rjw@sisk.pl \
--to=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkml@rtr.ca \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.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