mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: HATAYAMA Daisuke <d.hatayama@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: hpa@linux.intel.com, ebiederm@xmission.com, vgoyal@redhat.com,
	kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, fengguang.wu@intel.com,
	jingbai.ma@hp.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] x86, apic: Add disable_cpu_apicid kernel parameter
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 11:44:23 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131112104423.GB12849@pd.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131112095158.4902.75396.stgit@localhost6.localdomain6>

On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 06:51:58PM +0900, HATAYAMA Daisuke wrote:
> Add disable_cpu_apicid kernel parameter. To use this kernel parameter,
> specify an initial APIC ID of the corresponding CPU you want to
> disable.
> 
> This is mostly used for the kdump 2nd kernel to disable BSP to wake up
> multiple CPUs without causing system reset or hang due to sending INIT
> from AP to BSP.
> 
> Kdump users first figure out initial APIC ID of the BSP, CPU0 in the
> 1st kernel, for example from /proc/cpuinfo and then set up this kernel
> parameter for the 2nd kernel using the obtained APIC ID.
> 
> However, doing this procedure at each boot time manually is awkward,
> which should be automatically done by user-land service scripts, for
> example, kexec-tools on fedora/RHEL distributions.
> 
> This design is more flexible than disabling BSP in kernel boot time
> automatically in that in kernel boot time we have no choice but
> referring to ACPI/MP table to obtain initial APIC ID for BSP, meaning
> that the method is not applicable to the systems without such BIOS
> tables.
> 
> One assumption behind this design is that users get initial APIC ID of
> the BSP in still healthy state and so BSP is uniquely kept in
> CPU0. Thus, through the kernel parameter, only one initial APIC ID can
> be specified.
> 
> Signed-off-by: HATAYAMA Daisuke <d.hatayama@jp.fujitsu.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c |   29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c
> index b60ad92..075bf23 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.c
> @@ -78,6 +78,13 @@ unsigned int max_physical_apicid;
>  physid_mask_t phys_cpu_present_map;
>  
>  /*
> + * Processor to be disabled specified by kernel parameter
> + * disable_cpu_apicid=<int>, mostly used for the kdump 2nd kernel to
> + * avoid undefined behaviour caused by sending INIT from AP to BSP.
> + */
> +unsigned int disabled_cpu_apicid = BAD_APICID;
> +
> +/*
>   * Map cpu index to physical APIC ID
>   */
>  DEFINE_EARLY_PER_CPU_READ_MOSTLY(u16, x86_cpu_to_apicid, BAD_APICID);
> @@ -2117,6 +2124,19 @@ void generic_processor_info(int apicid, int version)
>  	bool boot_cpu_detected = physid_isset(boot_cpu_physical_apicid,
>  				phys_cpu_present_map);
>  
> +	if (disabled_cpu_apicid != BAD_APICID &&
> +	    disabled_cpu_apicid != boot_cpu_physical_apicid &&
> +	    disabled_cpu_apicid == apicid) {
> +		int thiscpu = num_processors + disabled_cpus;
> +
> +		pr_warning("ACPI: Disable specified CPU."
> +			   " Processor %d/0x%x ignored.\n",
> +			   thiscpu, apicid);

How am I to parse this message - that 'thiscpu' is being disabled
currently? What does "Processor ... ignored" mean?

Why not just write:

	ACPI: Disabling requested CPU %d (APIC ID: 0x%x)

and everyone knows what's happening?

Thanks.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--

  reply	other threads:[~2013-11-12 10:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-11-12  9:51 [PATCH v5 0/3] x86, apic, kexec: Add disable_cpu_apic " HATAYAMA Daisuke
2013-11-12  9:51 ` [PATCH v5 1/3] x86, apic: add bsp_physical_apicid HATAYAMA Daisuke
2013-11-14 11:16   ` HATAYAMA Daisuke
2013-11-12  9:51 ` [PATCH v5 2/3] x86, apic: Add disable_cpu_apicid kernel parameter HATAYAMA Daisuke
2013-11-12 10:44   ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2013-11-14 10:42     ` HATAYAMA Daisuke
2013-11-12  9:52 ` [PATCH v5 3/3] Documentation, x86, apic, kexec: " HATAYAMA Daisuke

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=20131112104423.GB12849@pd.tnic \
    --to=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=d.hatayama@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=hpa@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=jingbai.ma@hp.com \
    --cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=vgoyal@redhat.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®