From: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/smpboot: Check for cpu_active on cpu initialization
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 17:18:31 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150720151831.GK13082@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150720151000.GB12256@nazgul.tnic>
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 05:10:00PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 05:02:40PM +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> > I have seen a report where this happens on bare metal, when the change
> > to the cpu_active bit becomes visible on the other CPU significantly
> > later than the the cpu_online bit. This happened on a pretty big machine
> > with 88 cores.
>
> So how about what I proposed at the end of my previous mail?
Oh sorry, I missed that. Setting cpu_active first should work on x86,
where writes become visible in the order they are executed. But this
function is in generic code and I have no idea what this change might
break on other architectures.
In the end cpu_active means that the scheduler can push tasks to the
CPU, no idea if some arch code breaks when the scheduler is already
working on a CPU before it becomes visibly online.
Joerg
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-20 15:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-16 9:17 [PATCH] x86/smpboot: Check for cpu_active on cpu initialization Joerg Roedel
2015-07-20 14:46 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-07-20 15:02 ` Joerg Roedel
2015-07-20 15:10 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-07-20 15:18 ` Joerg Roedel [this message]
2015-07-20 15:27 ` Borislav Petkov
2015-07-27 18:21 ` [PATCH] sched: fix cpu_active_mask/cpu_online_mask race Jan H. Schönherr
2015-07-30 16:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-30 19:17 ` [PATCH v2] " Jan H. Schönherr
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=20150720151831.GK13082@suse.de \
--to=jroedel@suse.de \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.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).