From: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
To: Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@linaro.org>
Cc: Stefano Stabellini <Stefano.Stabellini@eu.citrix.com>,
"xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
"rob.herring@calxeda.com" <rob.herring@calxeda.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] xen/arm: introduce xen_early_init, use PSCI on xen
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2013 15:47:08 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1304031525550.5078@kaball.uk.xensource.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.03.1304030955180.1171@syhkavp.arg>
On Wed, 3 Apr 2013, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Apr 2013, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2 Apr 2013, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2 Apr 2013, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > >
> > > > @@ -176,27 +178,30 @@ static int __init xen_secondary_init(unsigned int cpu)
> > > > return 0;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > +static void __init xen_smp_init(void)
> > > > +{
> > > > + if (psci_smp_available())
> > > > + smp_set_ops(&psci_smp_ops);
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > >
> > > I still don't understand why you need to do this. Why can't you just
> > > rely on the next priority which is to set PSCI ops by default if
> > > available? Using this hook for Xen doesn't look justified. As it is,
> > > you break MCPM.
> > >
> > > As I explained to you, MCPM will end up using PSCI as well when
> > > available, which I think should be sufficient for your concern.
> >
> > The smp_init hook is not limited to MCPM or the versatile express
> > platform. It's a generic hook that can be used by any platform and can
> > override the platform smp_ops or the psci_smp_ops depending on platform
> > specific configurations.
> >
> > Configurations that I am pretty sure won't be available on Xen anyway,
> > while I am certain that using psci_smp_ops would work.
> >
> > It seems to me that relying on the fact that only versatile express and
> > only MCPM use smp_init, even though it might work today, it's very
> > fragile and could break tomorrow without any of us noticing.
>
> I claim: this breaks MCPM today.
>
> You claim: the alternative _could_ break with Xen tomorrow.
>
> Could we please wait until there is an actual problem with Xen before
> being overly defensive in the code?
Sorry, I realized that I should have explained myself better.
The smp_init patch together with the MCPM patch series
(http://marc.info/?l=linux-arm-kernel&m=136004188122492) breaks Xen Dom0
SMP support on versatile express *today* (ifndef CONFIG_CLUSTER_PM):
smp_init is not NULL on versatile express anymore therefore smp_init is
going to be called, causing vexpress_smp_ops to be selected even if psci
is on device tree.
On the other hand if this patch was applied, xen_smp_init would override
smp_init making sure that psci_smp_ops is used on Xen and everything
would work as expected.
So as it stands today, we need this patch for regular Xen Dom0 SMP
support.
BTW I have actually tried it on my versatile express machine to make
sure that it is correct :)
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-04-03 14:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-04-02 16:16 [PATCH 0/3 v5] arm: introduce psci_smp_ops and use them on Xen Stefano Stabellini
2013-04-02 16:16 ` [PATCH v5 1/3] arm: introduce psci_smp_ops Stefano Stabellini
2013-04-02 16:46 ` Will Deacon
2013-04-02 17:41 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-04-03 11:29 ` Stefano Stabellini
2013-04-02 16:16 ` [PATCH v5 2/3] ARM: Enable selection of SMP operations at boot time Stefano Stabellini
2013-04-02 16:16 ` [PATCH v5 3/3] xen/arm: introduce xen_early_init, use PSCI on xen Stefano Stabellini
2013-04-02 17:34 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-04-03 11:28 ` Stefano Stabellini
2013-04-03 14:00 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-04-03 14:47 ` Stefano Stabellini [this message]
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=alpine.DEB.2.02.1304031525550.5078@kaball.uk.xensource.com \
--to=stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nicolas.pitre@linaro.org \
--cc=rob.herring@calxeda.com \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.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®