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]

Message-ID: <20090916074848.GB4870@osiris.boeblingen.de.ibm.com>
Date:	Wed, 16 Sep 2009 09:48:49 +0200
From:	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
To:	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...ibm.com>,
	Joel Schopp <jschopp@...tin.ibm.com>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	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, Sep 15, 2009 at 08:28:34PM +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:
> * Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> [2009-09-15 14:11:41]:
> 
> > 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. 
> >
> 
> From a design standpoint where we stand today is
> 
> 1. A cede indicates that the CPU is no longer needed and can be
> reassigned (remember we do dedicated CPU partitions in power)
> 2. What this patch is trying to do is to say "We don't need the
> CPU, but please don't reassign, put it to sleep"

FWIW, this sounds exactly like the same we have already on s390.
But back then I didn't consider adding a common code infrastructure
would make sense :)

Besides the "online" attribute we have an additional "configure"
attribute to which can only be written if the cpu is offline.
Writing a "0" to it would mean that you currently won't need the cpu
anymore and the hypervisor is free to reassign the cpu to a different
LPAR.
Writing a "1" to it means you want to use it. If there are enough
resources you will get it. If not.. bad luck.
--
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/