lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Feb]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH v4 -next 1/4] Move kmsg_dump(KMSG_DUMP_PANIC) below smp_send_stop()
On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 10:32:31PM +0000, Luck, Tony wrote:
> > What if we send the REBOOT_IPI first and let it block for up to a second.
> > Most code paths that are done with spin_locks will use
> > spin_lock_irqrestore. As soon as the interrupts are re-enabled the
> > REBOOT_IPI comes in and takes the processor. If after a second the cpu
> > still is blocking interrupts, just use the NMI as a big hammer to shut it
> > down.
>
> This looks good - it certainly deals with my "if we just let them run
> a bit, they'd release the locks" quibble. One second sounds very
> generous - but I'm not going to bikeshed that (so long as it is a total
> of one second - not one second per cpu). So the pseudo-code is:

This is how the stop_cpus is implemented on x86 and the one second comes
from there

arch/x86/kernel/smp.c::native_irq_stop_other_cpus and
native_nmi_stop_other_cpus

>
> send_reboot_ipi_to_everyone_else()
>
> wait_1_second()
>
> for_each_cpu_that_didnt_respond_to_reboot_ipi {
> hit_that_cpu_with_NMI()
> }
>
> Perhaps a notification printk() if we had to use the NMI hammer?

Yes.

Again this is for x86, but I guess that is our common case with pstore.

Cheers,
Don


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-02-04 00:01    [W:0.108 / U:3.196 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site