From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762962AbYBBAH7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Feb 2008 19:07:59 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1762132AbYBBAHv (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Feb 2008 19:07:51 -0500 Received: from gprs189-60.eurotel.cz ([160.218.189.60]:52258 "EHLO amd.ucw.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758291AbYBBAHu (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Feb 2008 19:07:50 -0500 Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 23:15:12 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: kernel list Cc: Linux-pm mailing list , "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: x86/.../trampoline_64.S racy? Message-ID: <20080201221512.GA13276@elf.ucw.cz> References: <20080201220716.GA8597@elf.ucw.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080201220716.GA8597@elf.ucw.cz> X-Warning: Reading this can be dangerous to your mental health. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri 2008-02-01 23:07:16, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > I'm trying to reuse trampoline_64.S for wakeup from ACPI s3... but I'm > getting some badness: If I insert delay loops into trampoline_64.S, > machine fails to boot; but I already increased cpu bootup delay to 200 > seconds... > > Is it possible that bootup is subtly racy somewhere? No, I just missed another place with timeout: /* * Wait 5s total for a response */ for (timeout = 0; timeout < 5000000; timeout++) { if (cpu_isset(cpu, cpu_callin_map)) break; /* It has booted */ udelay(100); } Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html