On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 11:02 AM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org> wrote:

On 05/19/2010 08:36 AM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> The core suspend/resume code is run from stop_machine on CPU0 but
> parts of the suspend/resume machinery (including xen_arch_resume) are
> run on whichever CPU happened to schedule the xenwatch kernel thread.
>
> As part of the non-core resume code xen_arch_resume is called in order
> to restart the timer tick on non-boot processors. The boot processor
> itself is taken care of by core timekeeping code.
>
> xen_arch_resume uses smp_call_function which does not call the given
> function on the current processor. This means that we can end up with
> one CPU not receiving timer ticks if the xenwatch thread happened to
> be scheduled on CPU > 0.
>
> Use on_each_cpu instead of smp_call_function to ensure the timer tick
> is resumed everywhere.
>

Argh, that seems to be a pretty common trap to fall into. Looks OK (but
unfortunately doesn't fix my other problem).

Acked-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com>

J

> Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
> Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
> Cc: Stable Kernel <stable@kernel.org>
> ---
> arch/x86/xen/suspend.c | 4 ++--
> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/suspend.c b/arch/x86/xen/suspend.c
> index 987267f..a9c6611 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/xen/suspend.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/xen/suspend.c
> @@ -60,6 +60,6 @@ static void xen_vcpu_notify_restore(void *data)
>
> void xen_arch_resume(void)
> {
> - smp_call_function(xen_vcpu_notify_restore,
> - (void *)CLOCK_EVT_NOTIFY_RESUME, 1);
> + on_each_cpu(xen_vcpu_notify_restore,
> + (void *)CLOCK_EVT_NOTIFY_RESUME, 1);
> }
>

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel