linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] cpu: pseries: Cpu offline states framework

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 15 Sep 2009 14:11:41 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>
Cc:	Joel Schopp <jschopp@...tin.ibm.com>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ibm.com>,
	Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>,
	Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@...ibm.com>,
	Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Arun R Bharadwaj <arun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] cpu: pseries: Cpu offline states framework

On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 17:36 +0530, Gautham R Shenoy wrote:
> This patchset contains the offline state driver implemented for
> pSeries. For pSeries, we define three available_hotplug_states. They are:
> 
>         online: The processor is online.
> 
>         offline: This is the the default behaviour when the cpu is offlined
>         even in the absense of this driver. The CPU would call make an
>         rtas_stop_self() call and hand over the CPU back to the resource pool,
>         thereby effectively deallocating that vCPU from the LPAR.
>         NOTE: This would result in a configuration change to the LPAR
>         which is visible to the outside world.
> 
>         inactive: This cedes the vCPU to the hypervisor with a cede latency
>         specifier value 2.
>         NOTE: This option does not result in a configuration change
>         and the vCPU would be still entitled to the LPAR to which it earlier
>         belong to.
> 
> Any feedback on the patchset will be immensely valuable.

I still think its a layering violation... its the hypervisor manager
that should be bothered in what state an off-lined cpu is in. 



--
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/