Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1281080
| From | "Suzuki K. Poulose" <Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] arm64: Move kill_cpu_early to smp.c |
| Date | 2015-12-01 18:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qAX4e-4do-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <qAUSJ-2T0-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <qAUSL-2T0-47@gated-at.bofh.it> <qAV2q-2WT-19@gated-at.bofh.it> <qAVF7-3r6-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <qAW8a-3BH-17@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 01/12/15 16:31, Mark Rutland wrote: > For PSCI 0.2+ we can query AFFINITY_INFO to discover whether a CPU is > whether or not it is in the firmware (i.e. whether or not it is > potentially in the kernel), so we can certainly query this in some > cases. > > We already do this in the usual hotplug-off case; see cpu_kill. OK, good to know. >> Correct, I didn't think about kexec. May be we could indicate the result >> back (that we are looping in kernel) in secondary_data and that could solve >> the synchronisation part ? > > I think we need to have two flags, a cpu-must-die flag in secondary > data, and a global stuck-in-the-kernel flag. > > The CPU wanting to die could set its cpu-must-die flag, signal the > completion, then cpu_die(). The CPU awaiting the completion would then > check cpu-must-die, and if so, cpu_kill() that CPU. If not set, we had a > successful onlining. Correct. > > We need stuck-in-the-kernel flag to account for CPUs which didn't manage > to turn the MMU on (which are either in the spin-table, or failed when > they were individually onlined). Did you mean to say "turn the MMU off" ? Cheers Suzuki -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH v2 0/6] arm64: cpufeature: Add sanity check for ASIDBits "Suzuki K. Poulose" <suzuki.poulose@arm.com> - 2015-12-01 16:20 +0100
[PATCH v2 4/6] arm64: Add hook for checking early CPU features "Suzuki K. Poulose" <suzuki.poulose@arm.com> - 2015-12-01 16:20 +0100
[PATCH v2 1/6] arm64: Introduce kill_cpu_early "Suzuki K. Poulose" <suzuki.poulose@arm.com> - 2015-12-01 16:20 +0100
[PATCH v2 2/6] arm64: Move kill_cpu_early to smp.c "Suzuki K. Poulose" <suzuki.poulose@arm.com> - 2015-12-01 16:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] arm64: Move kill_cpu_early to smp.c Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> - 2015-12-01 16:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] arm64: Move kill_cpu_early to smp.c "Suzuki K. Poulose" <Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com> - 2015-12-01 17:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] arm64: Move kill_cpu_early to smp.c Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> - 2015-12-01 17:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] arm64: Move kill_cpu_early to smp.c "Suzuki K. Poulose" <Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com> - 2015-12-01 18:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] arm64: Move kill_cpu_early to smp.c Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> - 2015-12-01 19:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] arm64: Move kill_cpu_early to smp.c "Suzuki K. Poulose" <Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com> - 2015-12-01 19:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] arm64: Move kill_cpu_early to smp.c Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> - 2015-12-01 20:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] arm64: Move kill_cpu_early to smp.c "Suzuki K. Poulose" <Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com> - 2015-12-03 17:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] arm64: Move kill_cpu_early to smp.c Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> - 2015-12-03 18:10 +0100
[PATCH v2 6/6] arm64: Ensure the secondary CPUs have safe ASIDBits size "Suzuki K. Poulose" <suzuki.poulose@arm.com> - 2015-12-01 16:20 +0100
[PATCH v2 5/6] arm64: Add helper for extracting ASIDBits "Suzuki K. Poulose" <suzuki.poulose@arm.com> - 2015-12-01 16:20 +0100
csiph-web