lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Feb]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v9 0/8] Parallel CPU bringup for x86_64
On 21.02.2023 12:49, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On 21 February 2023 11:46:04 GMT, Oleksandr Natalenko
> <oleksandr@natalenko.name> wrote:
>> On 21.02.2023 11:27, David Woodhouse wrote:
>>> On 21 February 2023 09:49:51 GMT, Oleksandr Natalenko
>>> <oleksandr@natalenko.name> wrote:
>>>> On 21.02.2023 10:06, David Woodhouse wrote:
>>>>> Why does arch/x86/kernel/acpi/sleep.c::x86_acpi_suspend_lowlevel()
>>>>> set
>>>>>
>>>>> initial_gs = per_cpu_offset(smp_processor_id()) ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Would it not be CPU#0 that comes back up, and should it not get
>>>>> per_cpu_offset(0) ?
>>>>
>>>> Wanna me try `initial_gs = per_cpu_offset(0);` too?
>>>
>>> Hm, yes please. There's another one to make zero on the next line up,
>>> I think?
>>
>> So,
>>
>> ```
>> early_gdt_descr.address = (unsigned long)get_cpu_gdt_rw(0);
>> initial_gs = per_cpu_offset(0);
>> ```
>>
>> ?
>>
>> Should I leave `smpboot_control = 0;` commented out, or I should
>> uncomment it back?
>
> Put it back, else those things don't matter. Thanks.

With this in place:

```
early_gdt_descr.address = (unsigned long)get_cpu_gdt_rw(0);
initial_gs = per_cpu_offset(0);
smpboot_control = 0;
```

the resume does not work.

--
Oleksandr Natalenko (post-factum)

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-03-27 00:30    [W:0.073 / U:0.192 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site