From: HATAYAMA Daisuke <d.hatayama@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: hpa@zytor.com, ebiederm@xmission.com
Cc: len.brown@intel.com, fenghua.yu@intel.com, x86@kernel.org,
kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
rob.herring@calxeda.com, grant.likely@secretlab.ca,
tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@elte.hu, vgoyal@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] x86, apic: Disable BSP if boot cpu is AP
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 12:24:06 +0900 (JST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121026.122406.13396329.d.hatayama@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5085E663.6040307@zytor.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 2094 bytes --]
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] x86, apic: Disable BSP if boot cpu is AP
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 17:35:47 -0700
> On 10/22/2012 02:29 PM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>>
>>> As I said, I thought Fenghua tried that but it didn't work,
>>> experimentally.
>>
>> Fair enough. You described the problem with clearing bit 8 in a weird
>> way.
>>
>> If the best we can muster are fuzzy memories it may be worth
>> revisiting.
>> Perhaps it works on enough cpu models to be interesting.
>>
>
> It isn't fuzzy memories... this was done as late as 1-2 months ago. I
> just don't know the details.
>
> Fenghua, could you help fill us in?
>
I overlooked completely the fact that BSP flag is rewritable.
I tried Eric's suggestion using attached test programs and saw it
worked fine at least on the three cpus around me below:
- Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E7- 4820 @ 2.00GHz
- Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E7- 8870 @ 2.40GHz
- Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 1.80GHz
- 32 bits CPU
Next I found the description about this in 8.4.2, IASDM Vol.3:
The MP initialization protocol imposes the following requirements
and restrictions on the system:
* The MP protocol is executed only after a power-up or RESET. If the
MP protocol has completed and a BSP is chosen, subsequent INITs
(either to a specific processor or system wide) do not cause the
MP protocol to be repeated. Instead, each logical processor
examines its BSP flag (in the IA32_APIC_BASE MSR) to determine
whether it should execute the BIOS boot-strap code (if it is the
BSP) or enter a wait-for-SIPI state (if it is an AP).
So this is no longer undocumented behaviour for recent cpus, I think.
Considering these, I'll make a patch to clear BSP flag at appropreate
position in kernel boot-up code. OTOH, according to the discussion, it
was reported that clearing BSP flag affected some BIOSes. To deal with
this, I'll prepare a kernel option to decide whether to clear BSP flag
or not.
Does anyone have any comments now? Or please comment after I submit a
new patch.
Thanks.
HATAYAMA, Daisuke
[-- Attachment #2: bsp_flag_modules.tar.bz2 --]
[-- Type: Application/Octet-Stream, Size: 9296 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-26 3:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-16 4:35 [PATCH v1 0/2] " HATAYAMA Daisuke
2012-10-16 4:35 ` [PATCH v1 1/2] x86, apic: Introduce boot_cpu_is_bsp indicating whether boot cpu is BSP or not HATAYAMA Daisuke
2012-10-16 4:35 ` [PATCH v1 2/2] x86, apic: Disable BSP if boot cpu is AP HATAYAMA Daisuke
2012-10-22 20:04 ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-10-22 20:16 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-10-22 20:31 ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-10-22 20:33 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-10-22 20:38 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-10-22 20:43 ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-10-22 20:47 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-10-22 21:29 ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-10-23 0:35 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-10-26 3:24 ` HATAYAMA Daisuke [this message]
2012-10-26 4:13 ` Eric W. Biederman
2013-03-11 1:07 ` HATAYAMA Daisuke
2013-03-11 2:13 ` HATAYAMA Daisuke
2013-03-11 4:11 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-10-16 4:51 ` [PATCH v1 0/2] " Yu, Fenghua
2012-10-16 5:03 ` HATAYAMA Daisuke
2012-10-16 5:14 ` Yu, Fenghua
2012-10-16 6:38 ` HATAYAMA Daisuke
2012-10-22 16:02 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-10-16 5:15 ` HATAYAMA Daisuke
2012-10-17 14:12 ` Vivek Goyal
2012-10-18 3:08 ` HATAYAMA Daisuke
2012-10-18 14:14 ` Vivek Goyal
2012-10-19 3:20 ` HATAYAMA Daisuke
2012-10-19 15:17 ` Vivek Goyal
2012-10-22 6:32 ` HATAYAMA Daisuke
2012-10-22 18:37 ` Vivek Goyal
2012-10-22 17:10 ` Michael Holzheu
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=20121026.122406.13396329.d.hatayama@jp.fujitsu.com \
--to=d.hatayama@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
--cc=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rob.herring@calxeda.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
--cc=x86@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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®