Skip to contentSkip to conversation

arm64: Fix machine_shutdown() definition

PATCH New arunks.linux at gmail.com 3 participants 4 messages May 7, 2014 – May 16, 2014 arm64

lore
Share & tools
lore
#0 lore raw

PATCH 1/2 arm64: Fix machine_shutdown() definition

From: Arun KS <[email protected]>

This patch ports most of commit 19ab428f4b79 "ARM: 7759/1: decouple CPU offlining from reboot/shutdown" by Stephen Warren from arch/arm to arch/arm64.

machine_shutdown() is a hook for kexec. Add a comment saying so, since it isn't obvious from the function name.

Halt, power-off, and restart have different requirements re: stopping secondary CPUs than kexec has. The former simply require the secondary CPUs to be quiesced somehow, whereas kexec requires them to be completely non-operational, so that no matter where the kexec target images are written in RAM, they won't influence operation of the secondary CPUS,which could happen if the CPUs were still executing some kind of pin loop. To this end, modify machine_halt, power_off, and restart to call smp_send_stop() directly, rather than calling machine_shutdown().

In machine_shutdown(), replace the call to smp_send_stop() with a call to disable_nonboot_cpus(). This completely disables all but one CPU, thus satisfying the kexec requirements a couple paragraphs above.

---
 arch/arm64/kernel/process.c |   41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
 1 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
arch/arm64/kernel/process.c +35 -6
index 6391485..2d43614 100644
@@ -113,29 +113,58 @@ void arch_cpu_idle_dead(void)
 }
 #endif
 
+/*
+ * Called by kexec, immediately prior to machine_kexec().
+ *
+ * This must completely disable all secondary CPUs; simply causing those CPUs
+ * to execute e.g. a RAM-based pin loop is not sufficient. This allows the
+ * kexec'd kernel to use any and all RAM as it sees fit, without having to
+ * avoid any code or data used by any SW CPU pin loop. The CPU hotplug
+ * functionality embodied in disable_nonboot_cpus() to achieve this.
+ */
 void machine_shutdown(void)
 {
-#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
-	smp_send_stop();
-#endif
+	disable_nonboot_cpus();
 }
 
+/*
+ * Halting simply requires that the secondary CPUs stop performing any
+ * activity (executing tasks, handling interrupts). smp_send_stop()
+ * achieves this.
+ */
 void machine_halt(void)
 {
-	machine_shutdown();
+	smp_send_stop();
 	while (1);
 }
 
+/*
+ * Power-off simply requires that the secondary CPUs stop performing any
+ * activity (executing tasks, handling interrupts). smp_send_stop()
+ * achieves this. When the system power is turned off, it will take all CPUs
+ * with it.
+ */
 void machine_power_off(void)
 {
-	machine_shutdown();
+	smp_send_stop();
 	if (pm_power_off)
 		pm_power_off();
 }
 
+/*
+ * Restart requires that the secondary CPUs stop performing any activity
+ * while the primary CPU resets the system. Systems with a single CPU can
+ * use soft_restart() as their machine descriptor's .restart hook, since that
+ * will cause the only available CPU to reset. Systems with multiple CPUs must
+ * provide a HW restart implementation, to ensure that all CPUs reset at once.
+ * This is required so that any code running after reset on the primary CPU
+ * doesn't have to co-ordinate with other CPUs to ensure they aren't still
+ * executing pre-reset code, and using RAM that the primary CPU's code wishes
+ * to use. Implementing such co-ordination would be essentially impossible.
+ */
 void machine_restart(char *cmd)
 {
-	machine_shutdown();
+	smp_send_stop();
 
 	/* Disable interrupts first */
 	local_irq_disable();
Signature · 1 line
1.7.6
#1 lore raw

PATCH 2/2 arm64: Fix deadlock scenario with smp_send_stop()

From: Arun KS <[email protected]>

If one process calls sys_reboot and that process then stops other CPUs while those CPUs are within a spin_lock() region we can potentially encounter a deadlock scenario like below.

CPU 0 CPU 1
----- -----
spin_lock(my_lock)
smp_send_stop()
<send IPI> handle_IPI()

                         disable_preemption/irqs
                          while(1);

<PREEMPT>
spin_lock(my_lock) <--- Waits forever

We shouldn't attempt to run any other tasks after we send a stop IPI to a CPU so disable preemption so that this task runs to completion. We use local_irq_disable() here for cross-arch consistency with x86.

---
 arch/arm64/kernel/process.c |    5 +++--
 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
arch/arm64/kernel/process.c +3 -2
index 2d43614..abe57e0 100644
@@ -134,6 +134,7 @@ void machine_shutdown(void)
  */
 void machine_halt(void)
 {
+	local_irq_disable();
 	smp_send_stop();
 	while (1);
 }
@@ -146,6 +147,7 @@ void machine_halt(void)
  */
 void machine_power_off(void)
 {
+	local_irq_disable();
 	smp_send_stop();
 	if (pm_power_off)
 		pm_power_off();
@@ -164,10 +166,9 @@ void machine_power_off(void)
  */
 void machine_restart(char *cmd)
 {
-	smp_send_stop();
-
 	/* Disable interrupts first */
 	local_irq_disable();
+	smp_send_stop();
 
 	/* Now call the architecture specific reboot code. */
 	if (arm_pm_restart)
Signature · 1 line
1.7.6
#2 lore raw

PATCH 1/2 arm64: Fix machine_shutdown() definition

In reply to arunks.linux at gmail.com
Quoted 19 lines · arunks.linux at gmail.com

From: Arun KS <[email protected]>

This patch ports most of commit 19ab428f4b79 "ARM: 7759/1: decouple CPU offlining from reboot/shutdown" by Stephen Warren from arch/arm to arch/arm64.

machine_shutdown() is a hook for kexec. Add a comment saying so, since it isn't obvious from the function name.

Halt, power-off, and restart have different requirements re: stopping secondary CPUs than kexec has. The former simply require the secondary CPUs to be quiesced somehow, whereas kexec requires them to be completely non-operational, so that no matter where the kexec target images are written in RAM, they won't influence operation of the secondary CPUS,which could happen if the CPUs were still executing some kind of pin loop. To this end, modify machine_halt, power_off, and restart to call smp_send_stop() directly, rather than calling machine_shutdown().

Quoted 3 lines

In machine_shutdown(), replace the call to smp_send_stop() with a call to disable_nonboot_cpus(). This completely disables all but one CPU, thus satisfying the kexec requirements a couple paragraphs above.

I assume the code changes apply equally well to arm64 so,

maintainer
#3 lore raw

PATCH 1/2 arm64: Fix machine_shutdown() definition

In reply to arunks.linux at gmail.com
Quoted 5 lines · arunks.linux at gmail.com

From: Arun KS <[email protected]>

This patch ports most of commit 19ab428f4b79 "ARM: 7759/1: decouple CPU offlining from reboot/shutdown" by Stephen Warren from arch/arm to arch/arm64.

Both patches applied. Thanks.

Signature · 1 line
Catalin