[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111006221334.GB7085@google.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 15:13:34 -0700
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"tigran@...azian.fsnet.co.uk" <tigran@...azian.fsnet.co.uk>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"mingo@...e.hu" <mingo@...e.hu>, "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux PM mailing list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [BUGFIX][PATCH RESEND] Freezer, CPU hotplug, x86 Microcode:
Fix task freezing failures
Hello,
On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 02:05:49AM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
...
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/microcode_core.c b/arch/x86/kernel/microcode_core.c
> index f924280..cd7ef2f 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/microcode_core.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/microcode_core.c
> @@ -483,7 +483,15 @@ mc_cpu_callback(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long action, void *hcpu)
> sysfs_remove_group(&sys_dev->kobj, &mc_attr_group);
> pr_debug("CPU%d removed\n", cpu);
> break;
> - case CPU_DEAD:
> +
> + /*
> + * Do not invalidate the microcode if a CPU goes offline,
> + * because it would be impossible to get the microcode again
> + * from userspace when the CPU comes back up, if the userspace
> + * happens to be frozen at that moment by the freezer subsystem,
> + * for example, due to a suspend operation in progress.
> + */
> +
This still looks like a bandaid to me. The exclusion approach didn't
pan out?
Thank you.
--
tejun
--
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