From: Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, x86@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, penberg@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, smpboot: allow manual hotplug of CPUs
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 13:35:19 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50AD1EE7.6020304@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50AD1CB6.9030707@zytor.com>
On 11/21/2012 01:25 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 11/21/2012 10:22 AM, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> So far CPU hotplug was ignored for mptable implementations which support it by
>> having the hotpluggable CPUs marked as disabled during boot.
>>
>> The current kernel code detects that behaviour and actually deals with it
>> properly:
>>
>> [ 0.000000] Intel MultiProcessor Specification v1.4
>> [ 0.000000] MPTABLE: OEM ID: KVMCPU00
>> [ 0.000000] MPTABLE: Product ID: 0.1
>> [ 0.000000] MPTABLE: APIC at: 0xFEE00000
>> [ 0.000000] Processor #0 (Bootup-CPU)
>> [ 0.000000] Processor #1
>> [ 0.000000] Processor #2
>> [ 0.000000] IOAPIC[0]: apic_id 4, version 17, address 0xfec00000, GSI 0-23
>> [ 0.000000] Processors: 3
>> [ 0.000000] smpboot: Allowing 3 CPUs, 1 hotplug CPUs
>>
>> The problem begins when a user might actually want to online such CPU; there
>> is no interface for him to tell the kernel that the CPU is now present and
>> can be used.
>>
>> Luckily, the kernel provides a generic interface in the form of 'probe' and
>> 'release' sysfs files which are used on different architectures exactly for
>> that - to probe and release CPUs. On x86 however this was unimplemented
>> until now.
>>
>> This patch adds code into the x86 implementation of probe and release to allow
>> adding and removing CPUs. This allows machines that use mptable to hotplug
>> CPUs:
>>
>
> Reading between the lines, this sounds like would cause a user-visible
> difference between mptable platforms and ACPI platforms? If so, that is
> totally unacceptable. If not, the description is confusing.
With ACPI platforms you don't need probe/release because the hardware notifies
on CPU insert/eject - this doesn't exist on mptable which is why you have to
do it manually with probe/release.
The difference is already user visible: you can hotplug on ACPI, but can't on
mptables.
Yes, reading back the subject does sound confusing - a better one would probably
be "provide interface for CPU hotplug on mptable platforms" or something similar.
Thanks,
Sasha
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-11-21 18:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-11-21 18:22 Sasha Levin
2012-11-21 18:25 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-11-21 18:35 ` Sasha Levin [this message]
2012-11-21 18:38 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-11-21 19:19 ` Sasha Levin
2012-11-21 19:24 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-11-21 19:35 ` Sasha Levin
2012-11-21 19:39 ` H. Peter Anvin
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=50AD1EE7.6020304@oracle.com \
--to=sasha.levin@oracle.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--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®