From: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com>
To: "Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>, "mingo@elte.hu" <mingo@elte.hu>,
"hpa@zytor.com" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Pallipadi, Venkatesh" <venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] x86: Rendezvous all the cpu's for MTRR/PAT init
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 14:59:29 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090819065929.GA21824@sli10-desk.sh.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1250662857.2615.42.camel@sbs-t61>
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 02:20:57PM +0800, Siddha, Suresh B wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-08-18 at 18:01 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:30:35 -0700 Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com> wrote:
> > > + /*
> > > + * Ideally we should hold mtrr_mutex here to avoid mtrr entries changed,
> > > + * but this routine will be called in cpu boot time, holding the lock
> > > + * breaks it. This routine is called in two cases: 1.very earily time
> > > + * of software resume, when there absolutely isn't mtrr entry changes;
> > > + * 2.cpu hotadd time. We let mtrr_add/del_page hold cpuhotplug lock to
> > > + * prevent mtrr entry changes
> > > + */
> >
> > That's a tantalising little comment. What does "breaks it" mean? How
> > can reviewers and later code-readers possibly suggest alternative fixes
> > to this breakage if they aren't told what it is?
>
> This is a cut and paste comment coming from the previous code. Shaohua
> added this comment originally and I think this is the case he is trying
> to avoid.
>
> cpu - A modifying/adding a MTRR register
>
> cpu - B is coming online
>
> if cpu - A doesn't take the cpu hotplug lock, then potentially what can
> happen is that cpu B will update its mtrr's with old state and now A can
> change the state and before B comes completely online, A can do send the
> MTRR update to all cpu's except B.
>
> So Shaohua's code is taking cpu hotplug lock before A updates MTRR's so
> that B's MTRRs are always is in sync with rest of the cpu's in the
> system. Only the mtrr_mutex is not enough.
>
> Nevertheless as far as this patch is concerned mtrr_aps_init() gets
> called during early boot/resume time and as such we never hit this
> condition. So I removed this comment in the new patch appended.
>
> Shaohua if you agree with my explanation we can have a separate patch to
> make the original comment more meaningful.
Yes, your explanation is correct.
Thanks,
Shaohua
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-19 6:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-19 0:30 Suresh Siddha
2009-08-19 1:01 ` Andrew Morton
2009-08-19 6:20 ` Suresh Siddha
2009-08-19 6:59 ` Shaohua Li [this message]
2009-08-19 7:50 ` Nick Piggin
2009-08-19 13:10 ` Ingo Molnar
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=20090819065929.GA21824@sli10-desk.sh.intel.com \
--to=shaohua.li@intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=suresh.b.siddha@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®