From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>,
Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Bandan Das <bsd@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Linux 5.3-rc7
Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2019 12:17:54 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wikdDMYqhygJYkoWw7YxpGNx7O2kFRxbG91NNeFO7yu3w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1909071657430.1902@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
On Sat, Sep 7, 2019 at 8:00 AM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
> Ok let me find a testbox to figure out whats wrong there.
Honestly, it looks like we should just revert that commit, since we
never used to clear the LDR bits before either, and the bug it "fixes"
doesn't really seem to be a bug (well, it's a bug in KVM, but that's a
different thing).
And I wouldn't be at all surprised if it confuses some BIOS code.
We use the LDR bits ourselves in smp_get_logical_apicid(), and so
clearing them out seems entirely bogus.
At a guess, it's wakeup_cpu_via_init_nmi() that does that
if (apic->dest_logical == APIC_DEST_LOGICAL)
id = cpu0_logical_apicid;
else
id = apicid;
and now that we've cleared the APIC LDR bits, we no longer wake the
BSP. We send the NMI to the _old_ APIC ID, but we've overwritten it
with 0 when we put it to sleep, so now nothing happens.
I'm really not clear on why it's a good idea to clear the LDR bits on
shutdown, and commit 558682b52919 ("x86/apic: Include the LDR when
clearing out APIC registers") just looks pointless. And now it has
proven to break some machines.
So why wouldn't we just revert it?
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-09-07 19:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-09-02 17:28 Linux 5.3-rc7 Linus Torvalds
2019-09-07 10:10 ` Chris Wilson
2019-09-07 14:29 ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-09-07 14:41 ` Chris Wilson
2019-09-07 15:00 ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-09-07 15:24 ` Chris Wilson
2019-09-07 20:12 ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-09-07 19:17 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2019-09-07 19:27 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-09-09 13:54 ` Bandan Das
2019-09-07 20:44 ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-09-07 21:13 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-09-08 11:02 ` Sasha Levin
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='CAHk-=wikdDMYqhygJYkoWw7YxpGNx7O2kFRxbG91NNeFO7yu3w@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bsd@redhat.com \
--cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).