[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110907104633.GR6619@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2011 11:46:33 +0100
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@...sony.com>,
"paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Rowand, Frank" <Frank_Rowand@...yusa.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...x.de>,
Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] 3.0.1-rt11
On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 11:25:29AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> This smells badly like the problem we've seen on x86 before. And
> looking at the arm SMP boot code:
>
> asmlinkage void __cpuinit secondary_start_kernel(void)
> {
> .....
>
> /*
> * Give the platform a chance to do its own initialisation.
> */
> platform_secondary_init(cpu);
>
> /*
> * Enable local interrupts.
> */
> notify_cpu_starting(cpu);
> local_irq_enable();
>
> Here we enable interrupts, but the CPU is neither online nor active.
>
> local_fiq_enable();
That's intentional. Some of the code below needs IRQs enabled.
I think we had this reported before and I got to the bottom of it - the
platform was doing something it shouldn't. I don't remember the details,
maybe when all the emails come through I can see the original bug report
I'll remember.
--
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