From: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> To: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>, Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>, xen-devel@lists.xen.org Cc: sstabellini@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@oracle.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: xen: Implement EFI reset_system callback Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2017 10:37:25 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <e0ee37da-923f-aa17-ad8d-acb25d277fce@suse.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <3f6f5853-cd08-8afc-f71a-b0c1545c7564@arm.com> On 06/04/17 10:32, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi Juergen, > > On 06/04/17 07:23, Juergen Gross wrote: >> On 05/04/17 21:49, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: >>> On 04/05/2017 02:14 PM, Julien Grall wrote: >>>> The x86 code has theoritically a similar issue, altought EFI does not >>>> seem to be the preferred method. I have left it unimplemented on x86 >>>> and >>>> CCed Linux Xen x86 maintainers to know their view here. >>> >>> (+Daniel) >>> >>> This could be a problem for x86 as well, at least theoretically. >>> xen_machine_power_off() may call pm_power_off(), which is >>> efi.reset_system. >>> >>> So I think we should have a similar routine there. >> >> +1 >> >> I don't see any problem with such a routine added, in contrast to >> potential "reboots" instead of power off without it. >> >> So I think this dummy xen_efi_reset_system() should be added to >> drivers/xen/efi.c instead. > > I will resend the patch during day with xen_efi_reset_system moved to > common code and implement the x86 counterpart (thought, I will not be > able to test it). I'm rather sure it isn't hit very often. Otherwise there would be more complaints about crashes during power off (in fact I do remember several occasions where somebody claimed power off seemed to do a reboot only). Juergen >> >>>> This should also probably be fixed in stable tree. >> >> Yes. > > I will CC stable. > > Thank you, >
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: jgross@suse.com (Juergen Gross) To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: [PATCH] arm64: xen: Implement EFI reset_system callback Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2017 10:37:25 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <e0ee37da-923f-aa17-ad8d-acb25d277fce@suse.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <3f6f5853-cd08-8afc-f71a-b0c1545c7564@arm.com> On 06/04/17 10:32, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi Juergen, > > On 06/04/17 07:23, Juergen Gross wrote: >> On 05/04/17 21:49, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: >>> On 04/05/2017 02:14 PM, Julien Grall wrote: >>>> The x86 code has theoritically a similar issue, altought EFI does not >>>> seem to be the preferred method. I have left it unimplemented on x86 >>>> and >>>> CCed Linux Xen x86 maintainers to know their view here. >>> >>> (+Daniel) >>> >>> This could be a problem for x86 as well, at least theoretically. >>> xen_machine_power_off() may call pm_power_off(), which is >>> efi.reset_system. >>> >>> So I think we should have a similar routine there. >> >> +1 >> >> I don't see any problem with such a routine added, in contrast to >> potential "reboots" instead of power off without it. >> >> So I think this dummy xen_efi_reset_system() should be added to >> drivers/xen/efi.c instead. > > I will resend the patch during day with xen_efi_reset_system moved to > common code and implement the x86 counterpart (thought, I will not be > able to test it). I'm rather sure it isn't hit very often. Otherwise there would be more complaints about crashes during power off (in fact I do remember several occasions where somebody claimed power off seemed to do a reboot only). Juergen >> >>>> This should also probably be fixed in stable tree. >> >> Yes. > > I will CC stable. > > Thank you, >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-06 8:37 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 84+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2017-04-05 18:14 [PATCH] arm64: xen: Implement EFI reset_system callback Julien Grall 2017-04-05 18:14 ` Julien Grall 2017-04-05 19:49 ` Boris Ostrovsky 2017-04-05 19:49 ` Boris Ostrovsky 2017-04-05 19:49 ` Boris Ostrovsky 2017-04-06 6:23 ` Juergen Gross 2017-04-06 6:23 ` Juergen Gross 2017-04-06 6:23 ` Juergen Gross 2017-04-06 8:32 ` Julien Grall 2017-04-06 8:32 ` Julien Grall 2017-04-06 8:32 ` Julien Grall 2017-04-06 8:37 ` Juergen Gross [this message] 2017-04-06 8:37 ` Juergen Gross 2017-04-06 8:37 ` Juergen Gross 2017-04-06 14:27 ` Daniel Kiper 2017-04-06 14:27 ` Daniel Kiper 2017-04-06 14:32 ` Julien Grall 2017-04-06 14:32 ` Julien Grall 2017-04-06 14:37 ` Boris Ostrovsky 2017-04-06 14:37 ` Boris Ostrovsky 2017-04-06 14:37 ` Boris Ostrovsky 2017-04-06 14:32 ` Julien Grall 2017-04-06 14:38 ` Juergen Gross 2017-04-06 14:38 ` Juergen Gross 2017-04-06 15:20 ` Daniel Kiper 2017-04-06 15:20 ` Daniel Kiper 2017-04-06 15:39 ` Julien Grall 2017-04-06 15:39 ` Julien Grall 2017-04-06 15:55 ` Mark Rutland 2017-04-06 15:55 ` Mark Rutland 2017-04-06 15:55 ` Mark Rutland 2017-04-06 15:55 ` Mark Rutland 2017-04-18 13:46 ` Matt Fleming 2017-04-18 13:46 ` Matt Fleming 2017-04-18 13:46 ` Matt Fleming 2017-04-18 13:46 ` Matt Fleming 2017-04-19 19:29 ` Daniel Kiper 2017-04-19 19:29 ` Daniel Kiper 2017-04-19 19:29 ` Daniel Kiper 2017-04-19 19:29 ` Daniel Kiper 2017-04-19 19:37 ` Matt Fleming 2017-04-19 19:37 ` Matt Fleming 2017-04-19 19:37 ` Matt Fleming 2017-04-19 19:43 ` Daniel Kiper 2017-04-19 19:43 ` Daniel Kiper 2017-04-19 19:43 ` Daniel Kiper 2017-04-19 19:43 ` Daniel Kiper 2017-04-19 19:37 ` Matt Fleming 2017-04-06 16:06 ` Daniel Kiper 2017-04-06 16:06 ` Daniel Kiper 2017-04-06 16:06 ` Daniel Kiper 2017-04-06 16:22 ` Juergen Gross 2017-04-06 16:22 ` Juergen Gross 2017-04-06 16:22 ` Juergen Gross 2017-04-06 16:43 ` Daniel Kiper 2017-04-06 16:43 ` Daniel Kiper 2017-04-06 16:43 ` Daniel Kiper 2017-04-06 17:39 ` Juergen Gross 2017-04-06 17:39 ` Juergen Gross 2017-04-18 18:37 ` Stefano Stabellini 2017-04-18 18:37 ` Stefano Stabellini 2017-04-18 18:37 ` Stefano Stabellini 2017-04-18 18:43 ` Juergen Gross 2017-04-18 18:43 ` Juergen Gross 2017-04-18 18:43 ` Juergen Gross 2017-04-18 18:46 ` Stefano Stabellini 2017-04-18 18:46 ` Stefano Stabellini 2017-04-18 18:51 ` Juergen Gross 2017-04-18 18:51 ` Juergen Gross 2017-04-20 18:09 ` Julien Grall 2017-04-20 18:09 ` Julien Grall 2017-04-20 18:09 ` Julien Grall 2017-04-20 18:09 ` Julien Grall 2017-04-18 18:51 ` Juergen Gross 2017-04-18 18:46 ` Stefano Stabellini 2017-04-06 17:39 ` Juergen Gross 2017-04-06 15:39 ` Julien Grall 2017-04-06 15:20 ` Daniel Kiper 2017-04-06 14:38 ` Juergen Gross 2017-04-06 14:27 ` Daniel Kiper 2017-04-05 21:26 ` Stefano Stabellini 2017-04-05 21:26 ` Stefano Stabellini 2017-04-05 21:26 ` Stefano Stabellini -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below -- 2017-04-05 18:14 Julien Grall
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=e0ee37da-923f-aa17-ad8d-acb25d277fce@suse.com \ --to=jgross@suse.com \ --cc=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \ --cc=daniel.kiper@oracle.com \ --cc=julien.grall@arm.com \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=sstabellini@kernel.org \ --cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.