From: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
To: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@windriver.com>
Cc: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
briannorris@chromium.org,
Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>,
kgdb-bugreport@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v2] debug: More properly delay for secondary CPUs
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 16:09:21 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1477091361-2039-1-git-send-email-dianders@chromium.org> (raw)
We've got a delay loop waiting for secondary CPUs. That loop uses
loops_per_jiffy. However, loops_per_jiffy doesn't actually mean how
many tight loops make up a jiffy on all architectures. It is quite
common to see things like this in the boot log:
Calibrating delay loop (skipped), value calculated using timer
frequency.. 48.00 BogoMIPS (lpj=24000)
In my case I was seeing lots of cases where other CPUs timed out
entering the debugger only to print their stack crawls shortly after the
kdb> prompt was written.
Elsewhere in kgdb we already use udelay(), so that should be safe enough
to use to implement our timeout. We'll delay 1 ms for 1000 times, which
should give us a full second of delay (just like the old code wanted)
but allow us to notice that we're done every 1 ms.
Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
---
Changes in v2:
- Use udelay, not __delay
kernel/debug/debug_core.c | 6 ++++--
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/debug/debug_core.c b/kernel/debug/debug_core.c
index 0874e2edd275..85a246feb442 100644
--- a/kernel/debug/debug_core.c
+++ b/kernel/debug/debug_core.c
@@ -61,6 +61,8 @@
#include "debug_core.h"
+#define WAIT_CPUS_STOP_MS 1000
+
static int kgdb_break_asap;
struct debuggerinfo_struct kgdb_info[NR_CPUS];
@@ -598,11 +600,11 @@ static int kgdb_cpu_enter(struct kgdb_state *ks, struct pt_regs *regs,
/*
* Wait for the other CPUs to be notified and be waiting for us:
*/
- time_left = loops_per_jiffy * HZ;
+ time_left = WAIT_CPUS_STOP_MS;
while (kgdb_do_roundup && --time_left &&
(atomic_read(&masters_in_kgdb) + atomic_read(&slaves_in_kgdb)) !=
online_cpus)
- cpu_relax();
+ udelay(1000);
if (!time_left)
pr_crit("Timed out waiting for secondary CPUs.\n");
--
2.8.0.rc3.226.g39d4020
next reply other threads:[~2016-10-21 23:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-21 23:09 Douglas Anderson [this message]
2016-10-24 9:15 ` [PATCH v2] debug: More properly delay for secondary CPUs Daniel Thompson
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=1477091361-2039-1-git-send-email-dianders@chromium.org \
--to=dianders@chromium.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=briannorris@chromium.org \
--cc=daniel.thompson@linaro.org \
--cc=jason.wessel@windriver.com \
--cc=kgdb-bugreport@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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: 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).