linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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 12:27:42 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wimjeOCi4k7+nhzx3XWzvQUbMtNpcKNo8ZteodQ5c5APg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wikdDMYqhygJYkoWw7YxpGNx7O2kFRxbG91NNeFO7yu3w@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Sep 7, 2019 at 12:17 PM Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> 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?

Side note: looking around for the discussion about this patch, at
least one version of the patch from Bandan had

+       if (!x2apic_enabled) {

rather than

+       if (!x2apic_enabled()) {

which meant that whatever Bandan tested at that point was actually a
complete no-op, since "!x2apic_enabled" is never true (it tests a
function pointer against NULL, which it won't be).

Then that was fixed by the time it hit -tip (and eventually my tree),
but it kind of shows how the patch history of this is all
questionable. Further strengthened by a quote from that discussion:

 "this is really a KVM bug but it doesn't hurt to clear out the LDR in
the guest and then, it wouldn't need a hypervisor fix"

and clearly it *does* hurt to clear the LDR in the guest, making the
whole thinking behind the patch wrong and broken. The kernel clearly
_does_ depend on LDR having the right contents.

Now, I still suspect the boot problem then comes from our
cpu0_logical_apicid use mentioned in that previous email, but at this
point I think the proper fix is "revert for now, and we can look at
this as a cleanup with the cpu0_logical_apicid thing for 5.4 instead".

Hmm?

                   Linus

  reply	other threads:[~2019-09-07 19:28 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
2019-09-07 19:27           ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
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-=wimjeOCi4k7+nhzx3XWzvQUbMtNpcKNo8ZteodQ5c5APg@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).