[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0904141919350.3124@blonde.anvils>
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2009 19:25:42 +0100 (BST)
From: Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Dmitry Adamushko <dmitry.adamushko@...il.com>,
Peter Oruba <peter.oruba@....com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] x86 microcode: revert some work_on_cpu
Revert part of af5c820a3169e81af869c113e18ec7588836cd50
x86: cpumask: use work_on_cpu in arch/x86/kernel/microcode_core.c
That change is causing only one Intel CPU's microcode to be updated e.g.
microcode: CPU3 updated from revision 0x9 to 0x17, date = 2005-04-22
where before it announced that also for CPU0 and CPU1 and CPU2.
We cannot use work_on_cpu() in the CONFIG_MICROCODE_OLD_INTERFACE code,
because Intel's request_microcode_user() involves a copy_from_user() from
/sbin/microcode_ctl, which therefore needs to be on that CPU at the time.
Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
---
This may be not the only problem with that commit: I've seen lockdep
warnings from s2ram when suspending; but I think there have been other
work_on_cpu() lockdep issues, and you may already be on to them?
arch/x86/kernel/microcode_core.c | 33 +++++++++--------------------
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
--- 2.6.30-rc1/arch/x86/kernel/microcode_core.c 2009-04-08 18:19:28.000000000 +0100
+++ linux/arch/x86/kernel/microcode_core.c 2009-04-12 23:06:57.000000000 +0100
@@ -108,40 +108,29 @@ struct ucode_cpu_info ucode_cpu_info[NR
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ucode_cpu_info);
#ifdef CONFIG_MICROCODE_OLD_INTERFACE
-struct update_for_cpu {
- const void __user *buf;
- size_t size;
-};
-
-static long update_for_cpu(void *_ufc)
-{
- struct update_for_cpu *ufc = _ufc;
- int error;
-
- error = microcode_ops->request_microcode_user(smp_processor_id(),
- ufc->buf, ufc->size);
- if (error < 0)
- return error;
- if (!error)
- microcode_ops->apply_microcode(smp_processor_id());
- return error;
-}
-
static int do_microcode_update(const void __user *buf, size_t size)
{
+ cpumask_t old;
int error = 0;
int cpu;
- struct update_for_cpu ufc = { .buf = buf, .size = size };
+
+ old = current->cpus_allowed;
for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
struct ucode_cpu_info *uci = ucode_cpu_info + cpu;
if (!uci->valid)
continue;
- error = work_on_cpu(cpu, update_for_cpu, &ufc);
+
+ set_cpus_allowed_ptr(current, &cpumask_of_cpu(cpu));
+ error = microcode_ops->request_microcode_user(cpu, buf, size);
if (error < 0)
- break;
+ goto out;
+ if (!error)
+ microcode_ops->apply_microcode(cpu);
}
+out:
+ set_cpus_allowed_ptr(current, &old);
return error;
}
--
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