[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAFA6WYMJHr=r=3CvCq=nb1R_vt2jveJoyUXT4KsEtZea7wMF-w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2023 16:11:01 +0530
From: Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@...aro.org>
To: Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
kgdb-bugreport@...ts.sourceforge.net,
Lecopzer Chen <lecopzer.chen@...iatek.com>,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
Masayoshi Mizuma <msys.mizuma@...il.com>,
Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, ito-yuichi@...itsu.com,
Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
D Scott Phillips <scott@...amperecomputing.com>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@...aro.org>,
Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 3/6] arm64: smp: Remove dedicated wakeup IPI
On Thu, 24 Aug 2023 at 21:03, Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org> wrote:
>
> From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
>
> To enable NMI backtrace and KGDB's NMI cpu roundup, we need to free up
> at least one dedicated IPI.
>
> On arm64 the IPI_WAKEUP IPI is only used for the ACPI parking protocol,
> which itself is only used on some very early ARMv8 systems which
> couldn't implement PSCI.
>
> Remove the IPI_WAKEUP IPI, and rely on the IPI_RESCHEDULE IPI to wake
> CPUs from the parked state. This will cause a tiny amonut of redundant
> work to check the thread flags, but this is miniscule in relation to the
> cost of taking and handling the IPI in the first place. We can safely
> handle redundant IPI_RESCHEDULE IPIs, so there should be no functional
> impact as a result of this change.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
> Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
> Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
> Cc: Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@...aro.org>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Reviewed-by: Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@...aro.org>
-Sumit
> ---
> I have no idea how to test this. I just took Mark's patch and jammed
> it into my series. Logicially the patch seems reasonable to me.
>
> Changes in v11:
> - arch_send_wakeup_ipi() now takes an unsigned int.
>
> Changes in v10:
> - ("arm64: smp: Remove dedicated wakeup IPI") new for v10.
>
> arch/arm64/include/asm/smp.h | 4 ++--
> arch/arm64/kernel/acpi_parking_protocol.c | 2 +-
> arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c | 28 +++++++++--------------
> 3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/smp.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/smp.h
> index 9b31e6d0da17..efb13112b408 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/smp.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/smp.h
> @@ -89,9 +89,9 @@ extern void arch_send_call_function_single_ipi(int cpu);
> extern void arch_send_call_function_ipi_mask(const struct cpumask *mask);
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_ARM64_ACPI_PARKING_PROTOCOL
> -extern void arch_send_wakeup_ipi_mask(const struct cpumask *mask);
> +extern void arch_send_wakeup_ipi(unsigned int cpu);
> #else
> -static inline void arch_send_wakeup_ipi_mask(const struct cpumask *mask)
> +static inline void arch_send_wakeup_ipi(unsigned int cpu)
> {
> BUILD_BUG();
> }
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi_parking_protocol.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi_parking_protocol.c
> index b1990e38aed0..e1be29e608b7 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi_parking_protocol.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/acpi_parking_protocol.c
> @@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ static int acpi_parking_protocol_cpu_boot(unsigned int cpu)
> &mailbox->entry_point);
> writel_relaxed(cpu_entry->gic_cpu_id, &mailbox->cpu_id);
>
> - arch_send_wakeup_ipi_mask(cpumask_of(cpu));
> + arch_send_wakeup_ipi(cpu);
>
> return 0;
> }
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
> index 960b98b43506..a5848f1ef817 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
> @@ -72,7 +72,6 @@ enum ipi_msg_type {
> IPI_CPU_CRASH_STOP,
> IPI_TIMER,
> IPI_IRQ_WORK,
> - IPI_WAKEUP,
> NR_IPI
> };
>
> @@ -764,7 +763,6 @@ static const char *ipi_types[NR_IPI] __tracepoint_string = {
> [IPI_CPU_CRASH_STOP] = "CPU stop (for crash dump) interrupts",
> [IPI_TIMER] = "Timer broadcast interrupts",
> [IPI_IRQ_WORK] = "IRQ work interrupts",
> - [IPI_WAKEUP] = "CPU wake-up interrupts",
> };
>
> static void smp_cross_call(const struct cpumask *target, unsigned int ipinr);
> @@ -797,13 +795,6 @@ void arch_send_call_function_single_ipi(int cpu)
> smp_cross_call(cpumask_of(cpu), IPI_CALL_FUNC);
> }
>
> -#ifdef CONFIG_ARM64_ACPI_PARKING_PROTOCOL
> -void arch_send_wakeup_ipi_mask(const struct cpumask *mask)
> -{
> - smp_cross_call(mask, IPI_WAKEUP);
> -}
> -#endif
> -
> #ifdef CONFIG_IRQ_WORK
> void arch_irq_work_raise(void)
> {
> @@ -897,14 +888,6 @@ static void do_handle_IPI(int ipinr)
> break;
> #endif
>
> -#ifdef CONFIG_ARM64_ACPI_PARKING_PROTOCOL
> - case IPI_WAKEUP:
> - WARN_ONCE(!acpi_parking_protocol_valid(cpu),
> - "CPU%u: Wake-up IPI outside the ACPI parking protocol\n",
> - cpu);
> - break;
> -#endif
> -
> default:
> pr_crit("CPU%u: Unknown IPI message 0x%x\n", cpu, ipinr);
> break;
> @@ -979,6 +962,17 @@ void arch_smp_send_reschedule(int cpu)
> smp_cross_call(cpumask_of(cpu), IPI_RESCHEDULE);
> }
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARM64_ACPI_PARKING_PROTOCOL
> +void arch_send_wakeup_ipi(unsigned int cpu)
> +{
> + /*
> + * We use a scheduler IPI to wake the CPU as this avoids the need for a
> + * dedicated IPI and we can safely handle spurious scheduler IPIs.
> + */
> + arch_smp_send_reschedule(cpu);
> +}
> +#endif
> +
> #ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS_BROADCAST
> void tick_broadcast(const struct cpumask *mask)
> {
> --
> 2.42.0.rc1.204.g551eb34607-goog
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists