From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752145AbXCEIuO (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Mar 2007 03:50:14 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752149AbXCEIuO (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Mar 2007 03:50:14 -0500 Received: from mis011-1.exch011.intermedia.net ([64.78.21.128]:9264 "EHLO mis011-1.exch011.intermedia.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752145AbXCEIuM (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Mar 2007 03:50:12 -0500 Message-ID: <45EBD9BC.4030801@qumranet.com> Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2007 10:50:04 +0200 From: Avi Kivity User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (X11/20070212) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ingo Molnar CC: Linus Torvalds , Jens Axboe , Pavel Machek , Adrian Bunk , Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Thomas Gleixner , linux-pm@lists.osdl.org, Michal Piotrowski , Daniel Walker , Len Brown Subject: Re: [patch] KVM: T60 resume fix References: <20070227111515.GA4271@kernel.dk> <20070301093450.GA8508@elte.hu> <20070301104117.GA22788@elte.hu> <20070301145204.GA25304@elte.hu> <20070302072100.GB30634@elte.hu> <20070302080441.GA12785@elte.hu> <20070302102018.GA11549@elte.hu> <20070302102216.GA13575@elte.hu> <45E93012.4000100@qumranet.com> <20070305082251.GA23366@elte.hu> In-Reply-To: <20070305082251.GA23366@elte.hu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Mar 2007 08:50:11.0000 (UTC) FILETIME=[488BA380:01C75F03] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Avi Kivity wrote: > > >>> my T60 laptop does not resume correctly due to KVM attempting to >>> send an IPI to a CPU that might be down (or not up yet). (Doing so >>> also triggers the send_IPI_mask_bitmask() warning in >>> arch/i386/kernel/smp.c, line 732.) >>> >>> with this fix applied my laptop does not hang during resume. >>> >>> [ KVM will have to disable/enable virtualization on the CPU itself >>> that goes down / comes up, not via an IPI sent from the requesting >>> CPU. ] >>> > > >> That is already CPU_ONLINE in my tree (and in the pull request sent to >> Linus a couple of days ago). >> > > that solves the resume problem - but doesnt solve the CPU_DEAD issue of > sending an IPI to an already offline CPU. Might be a better idea to do > it in CPU_DOWN_PREPARE? (and then to also add a CPU_DOWN_FAILED branch?) > > Mainline now has DOWN_PREPARE and UP_CANCELED calling ->hardware_disable(), and ONLINE calling ->hardware_enabled(). What tree are you looking at? [but I do see the need for DOWN_FAILED now. Off to find a resumable machine...] -- Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.