[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191120104933.e6gkdjwkzulm6uak@e107158-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2019 10:49:34 +0000
From: Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@....com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>, linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/12] ia64: Replace cpu_down with freeze_secondary_cpus
On 11/20/19 09:46, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Nov 2019, Qais Yousef wrote:
> > On 11/19/19 23:59, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > On Tue, 19 Nov 2019, Qais Yousef wrote:
> > > > My plan was to simply make freeze_secondary_cpus() available and protected by
> > > > CONFIG_SMP only instead.
> > > >
> > > > Good plan?
> > >
> > > No. freeze_secondary_cpus() is really for hibernation. Look at the exit
> > > conditions there.
> >
> > Hmm do you mean the pm_wakeup_pending() abort?
> >
> > In arm64 we machine_shutdown() calls disable_nonboot_cpus(), which in turn
> > a wrapper around freeze_secondary_cpus() with 0 passed as an argument.
> >
> > IIUC this means arm64 could fail to offline all CPUs on machine_shutdown(),
> > correct?
>
> Looks like.
Okay I'll double check and introduce a new function to be called from
machine_down() for arm64 and ia64 if necessary.
Thanks
--
Qais Yousef
Powered by blists - more mailing lists