[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <94F013E7935FF44C83EBE7784D62AD3F092D1098@039-SN2MPN1-022.039d.mgd.msft.net>
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 09:51:11 +0000
From: Li Yang-R58472 <r58472@...escale.com>
To: Wood Scott-B07421 <B07421@...escale.com>,
Zhao Chenhui-B35336 <B35336@...escale.com>
CC: "linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 1/4] powerpc/85xx: add HOTPLUG_CPU support
> > struct smp_ops_t smp_85xx_ops = {
> > .kick_cpu = smp_85xx_kick_cpu,
> > -#ifdef CONFIG_KEXEC
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU
> > + .cpu_disable = generic_cpu_disable,
> > + .cpu_die = generic_cpu_die,
> > +#endif
> > .give_timebase = smp_generic_give_timebase,
> > .take_timebase = smp_generic_take_timebase,
> > -#endif
> > };
>
> We need to stop using smp_generic_give/take_timebase, not expand its use.
> This stuff breaks under hypervisors where timebase can't be written. It
> wasn't too bad before since we generally didn't enable CONFIG_KEXEC, but
> we're more likely to want CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU.
I understand that the guest OS shouldn't change the real timebase. But no matter what timebase syncing method we are using, the timebase need to be changed anyway for certain features. I think the better way should be trapping timebase modification in the hypervisor.
>
> Do the timebase sync the way U-Boot does -- if you find the appropriate
> guts node in the device tree.
That involves stopping timebase for a short time on all cores including the cores that are still online. Won't this be a potential issue?
- Leo
--
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