kvm.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
To: kvm@vger.kernel.org
Cc: thuth@redhat.com, borntraeger@de.ibm.com,
	linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, david@redhat.com, cohuck@redhat.com
Subject: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v4 4/9] s390x: smp: Rework cpu start and active tracking
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2020 08:42:49 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200121134254.4570-5-frankja@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200121134254.4570-1-frankja@linux.ibm.com>

The architecture specifies that processing sigp orders may be
asynchronous, and this is indeed the case on some hypervisors, so we
need to wait until the cpu runs before we return from the setup/start
function.

As there was a lot of duplicate code, a common function for cpu
restarts has been introduced.

Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
---
 lib/s390x/smp.c | 50 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/s390x/smp.c b/lib/s390x/smp.c
index f57f420..84e681d 100644
--- a/lib/s390x/smp.c
+++ b/lib/s390x/smp.c
@@ -104,35 +104,46 @@ int smp_cpu_stop_store_status(uint16_t addr)
 	return rc;
 }
 
+static int smp_cpu_restart_nolock(uint16_t addr, struct psw *psw)
+{
+	int rc;
+	struct cpu *cpu = smp_cpu_from_addr(addr);
+
+	if (!cpu)
+		return -1;
+	if (psw) {
+		cpu->lowcore->restart_new_psw.mask = psw->mask;
+		cpu->lowcore->restart_new_psw.addr = psw->addr;
+	}
+	rc = sigp(addr, SIGP_RESTART, 0, NULL);
+	if (rc)
+		return rc;
+	/*
+	 * The order has been accepted, but the actual restart may not
+	 * have been performed yet, so wait until the cpu is running.
+	 */
+	while (!smp_cpu_running(addr))
+		mb();
+	cpu->active = true;
+	return 0;
+}
+
 int smp_cpu_restart(uint16_t addr)
 {
-	int rc = -1;
-	struct cpu *cpu;
+	int rc;
 
 	spin_lock(&lock);
-	cpu = smp_cpu_from_addr(addr);
-	if (cpu) {
-		rc = sigp(addr, SIGP_RESTART, 0, NULL);
-		cpu->active = true;
-	}
+	rc = smp_cpu_restart_nolock(addr, NULL);
 	spin_unlock(&lock);
 	return rc;
 }
 
 int smp_cpu_start(uint16_t addr, struct psw psw)
 {
-	int rc = -1;
-	struct cpu *cpu;
-	struct lowcore *lc;
+	int rc;
 
 	spin_lock(&lock);
-	cpu = smp_cpu_from_addr(addr);
-	if (cpu) {
-		lc = cpu->lowcore;
-		lc->restart_new_psw.mask = psw.mask;
-		lc->restart_new_psw.addr = psw.addr;
-		rc = sigp(addr, SIGP_RESTART, 0, NULL);
-	}
+	rc = smp_cpu_restart_nolock(addr, &psw);
 	spin_unlock(&lock);
 	return rc;
 }
@@ -192,10 +203,7 @@ int smp_cpu_setup(uint16_t addr, struct psw psw)
 	lc->sw_int_crs[0] = 0x0000000000040000UL;
 
 	/* Start processing */
-	rc = sigp_retry(cpu->addr, SIGP_RESTART, 0, NULL);
-	if (!rc)
-		cpu->active = true;
-
+	smp_cpu_restart_nolock(addr, NULL);
 out:
 	spin_unlock(&lock);
 	return rc;
-- 
2.20.1


  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-01-21 13:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-01-21 13:42 [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v4 0/9] s390x: smp: Improve smp code and reset checks Janosch Frank
2020-01-21 13:42 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v4 1/9] s390x: smp: Cleanup smp.c Janosch Frank
2020-01-21 13:42 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v4 2/9] s390x: smp: Only use smp_cpu_setup once Janosch Frank
2020-01-23 13:45   ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-23 13:54     ` Janosch Frank
2020-01-23 13:56       ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-24  8:28         ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-24  8:38           ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-21 13:42 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v4 3/9] s390x: Add cpu id to interrupt error prints Janosch Frank
2020-01-23 10:02   ` Janosch Frank
2020-01-23 10:03     ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH] " Janosch Frank
2020-01-21 13:42 ` Janosch Frank [this message]
2020-01-21 17:40   ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v4 4/9] s390x: smp: Rework cpu start and active tracking David Hildenbrand
2020-01-22  8:25     ` Janosch Frank
2020-01-23  9:14     ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH] " Janosch Frank
2020-01-21 13:42 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v4 5/9] s390x: smp: Wait for cpu setup to finish Janosch Frank
2020-01-21 13:42 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v4 6/9] s390x: smp: Loop if secondary cpu returns into cpu setup again Janosch Frank
2020-01-21 14:28   ` Cornelia Huck
2020-01-21 17:36   ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-23 13:32   ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-23 13:47     ` Janosch Frank
2020-01-21 13:42 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v4 7/9] s390x: smp: Remove unneeded cpu loops Janosch Frank
2020-01-21 14:30   ` Cornelia Huck
2020-01-21 17:36   ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-21 13:42 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v4 8/9] s390x: smp: Test all CRs on initial reset Janosch Frank
2020-01-21 13:42 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH v4 9/9] s390x: smp: Dirty fpc before initial reset test Janosch Frank

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=20200121134254.4570-5-frankja@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=thuth@redhat.com \
    /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).