LKML Archive on
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Bandan Das <>
To: Linus Torvalds <>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <>,
	Chris Wilson <>,
	Linux List Kernel Mailing <>
Subject: Re: Linux 5.3-rc7
Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2019 09:54:13 -0400
Message-ID: <jpga7bdpoca.fsf@linux.bootlegged.copy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

Linus Torvalds <> writes:

> On Sat, Sep 7, 2019 at 12:17 PM Linus Torvalds
> <> 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()) {

I believe this crept up by accident when I was preparing the series, my testing
was with x2apic_enabled() but I didn't test CPU hotplug - only the kdump path
with 32 bit guest. In hindsight, I should have been more careful with testing,
sorry about that.


> 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 index

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-09-02 17:28 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
2019-09-09 13:54             ` Bandan Das [this message]
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 publically 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:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=jpga7bdpoca.fsf@linux.bootlegged.copy \ \ \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

LKML Archive on

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror lkml/git/0.git
	git clone --mirror lkml/git/1.git
	git clone --mirror lkml/git/2.git
	git clone --mirror lkml/git/3.git
	git clone --mirror lkml/git/4.git
	git clone --mirror lkml/git/5.git
	git clone --mirror lkml/git/6.git
	git clone --mirror lkml/git/7.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 lkml lkml/ \
	public-inbox-index lkml

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:

AGPL code for this site: git clone