[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <beefca46-ac7c-374b-e80a-4e7c3af2eb2b@citrix.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2020 23:30:10 +0100
From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>
To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
CC: <hpa@...or.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
<x86@...nel.org>, "Jan Kiszka" <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
"David Howells" <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...gle.com>,
Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...hat.com>,
Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@...cle.com>,
Steve Wahl <steve.wahl@....com>,
Mike Travis <mike.travis@....com>,
Dimitri Sivanich <dimitri.sivanich@....com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
Giovanni Gherdovich <ggherdovich@...e.cz>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Martin Molnar <martin.molnar.programming@...il.com>,
Pingfan Liu <kernelfans@...il.com>,
<jailhouse-dev@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/smpboot: Remove 486-isms from the modern AP boot path
On 01/04/2020 00:35, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Mar 2020, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
>>>> @@ -1118,7 +1121,7 @@ static int do_boot_cpu(int apicid, int cpu,
>>>> struct task_struct *idle,
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> - if (x86_platform.legacy.warm_reset) {
>>>> + if (!APIC_INTEGRATED(boot_cpu_apic_version)) {
>>>> /*
>>>> * Cleanup possible dangling ends...
>>>> */
>>> We don't support SMP on 486 and haven't for a very long time. Is there
>>> any reason to retain that code at all?
>> Not that I'm aware off.
> For the record: this code is for Pentium really, covering original P5
> systems, which lacked integrated APIC, as well as P54C systems that went
> beyond dual (e.g. ALR made quad-SMP P54C systems). They all used external
> i82489DX APICs for SMP support. Few were ever manufactured and getting
> across one let alone running Linux might be tough these days. I never
> managed to get one for myself, which would have been helpful for
> maintaining this code.
>
> Even though we supported them by spec I believe we never actually ran MP
> on any 486 SMP system (Alan Cox might be able to straighten me out on
> this); none that I know of implemented the MPS even though actual hardware
> might have used the APIC architecture. Compaq had its competing solution
> for 486 and newer SMP, actually deployed, the name of which I long forgot.
> We never supported it due to the lack of documentation combined with the
> lack of enough incentive for someone to reverse-engineer it.
:)
I chose "486-ism" based on what the MP spec said about external vs
integrated Local APICs. I can't claim to have any experience of those days.
I guess given v2 of the patch, I guess this should become "Remove
external-LAPIC support from the AP boot path" ?
~Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists