[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56606FA3.3010802@arm.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 16:36:51 +0000
From: "Suzuki K. Poulose" <Suzuki.Poulose@....com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, marc.zyngier@....com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, will.deacon@....com,
catalin.marinas@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] arm64: Move kill_cpu_early to smp.c
On 01/12/15 18:50, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 06:10:17PM +0000, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
>> On 01/12/15 17:52, Mark Rutland wrote:
>>> On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 05:38:54PM +0000, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
>>>> On 01/12/15 16:31, Mark Rutland wrote:
>> OK. So the flag will also be used for CPUs which are stuck-in-the-kernel
>> with MMU turned on. e.g, a CPU (using spin-table) we try to bring down
>> in kill_cpu_early(). Correct ?
>
> Yes.
>
> We'd also pad it such that nothing else shares the same writeback
> granule, and when writing to it with the MMU off we can invalidate the
> stale cached copy.
I have started working on this approach. But the changes are a bit more invasive
and looks more like suited for 4.5. We could push this series(which doesn't change
the current behavior as it is in 4.4-rc3, except for the code movement) to fix
the ASID sanity check and introduce the synchronisation part in 4.5.
What do you think ?
Cheers
Suzuki
--
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