[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1224504787-11403-1-git-send-email-ivecera@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 14:13:07 +0200
From: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@...hat.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com,
nhorman@...hat.com, jmarchan@...hat.com,
Ivan Vecera <ivecera@...hat.com>
Subject: [PATCH] x86: call machine_shutdown and stop all CPUs in native_machine_halt
Function machine_halt (resp. native_machine_halt) is empty for x86
architectures. When command 'halt -f' is invoked, the message
"System halted." is displayed but this is not really true because
all CPUs are still running.
There are also similar inconsistencies for other arches (some uses
power-off for halt or forever-loop with IRQs enabled/disabled).
IMO there should be used the same approach for all architectures
OR what does the message "System halted" really mean?
Signed-off-by: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@...hat.com>
---
arch/x86/kernel/reboot.c | 8 ++++++++
1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/reboot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/reboot.c
index f4c93f1..15ad949 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/reboot.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/reboot.c
@@ -465,6 +465,14 @@ static void native_machine_restart(char *__unused)
static void native_machine_halt(void)
{
+ /* stop other cpus and apics */
+ machine_shutdown();
+
+ /* stop this cpu */
+ local_irq_disable();
+ if (hlt_works(smp_processor_id()))
+ for (;;) halt();
+ for (;;);
}
static void native_machine_power_off(void)
--
1.5.6.3
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists