From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9ACBAC432C0 for ; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 09:49:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 40AFC222A0 for ; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 09:49:58 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 40AFC222A0 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47HLdv5LGKzDqdh for ; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 20:49:55 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=arm.com (client-ip=217.140.110.172; helo=foss.arm.com; envelope-from=qais.yousef@arm.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47HLbf3L1BzDqZQ for ; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 20:47:56 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EED2A1FB; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 01:47:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from e107158-lin.cambridge.arm.com (e107158-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.195.21]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3D0833F52E; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 01:47:50 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2019 09:47:47 +0000 From: Qais Yousef To: Michael Ellerman Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/12] powerpc: Replace cpu_up/down with device_online/offline Message-ID: <20191119094747.4asxwnmyrjy5d5io@e107158-lin.cambridge.arm.com> References: <20191030153837.18107-1-qais.yousef@arm.com> <20191030153837.18107-4-qais.yousef@arm.com> <87h830d5n8.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87h830d5n8.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20171215 X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , Ram Pai , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Nicholas Piggin , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras , Thomas Gleixner , Enrico Weigelt , Thiago Jung Bauermann Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On 11/19/19 12:19, Michael Ellerman wrote: > Qais Yousef writes: > > The core device API performs extra housekeeping bits that are missing > > from directly calling cpu_up/down. > > > > See commit a6717c01ddc2 ("powerpc/rtas: use device model APIs and > > serialization during LPM") for an example description of what might go > > wrong. > > > > This also prepares to make cpu_up/down a private interface for anything > > but the cpu subsystem. > > > > Signed-off-by: Qais Yousef > > CC: Benjamin Herrenschmidt > > CC: Paul Mackerras > > CC: Michael Ellerman > > CC: Enrico Weigelt > > CC: Ram Pai > > CC: Nicholas Piggin > > CC: Thiago Jung Bauermann > > CC: Christophe Leroy > > CC: Thomas Gleixner > > CC: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org > > CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > --- > > arch/powerpc/kernel/machine_kexec_64.c | 4 +++- > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > My initial though is "what about kdump", but that function is not called > during kdump, so there should be no issue with the extra locking leading > to deadlocks in a crash. > > Acked-by: Michael Ellerman Thanks. > > I assume you haven't actually tested it? Only compile tested it I'm afraid. Would appreciate if you can give it a spin. Otherwise I'd be happy to try it out on qemu. Cheers -- Qais Yousef