* Robin Holt wrote:
> I have the patches sort-of finished. The patch set starts by
> moving the halt/shutdown/reboot functions over to a new
> kernel/reboot.c, next patch gets a checkpatch.pl cleanup to
> work, third patch is essentially the below patch against the
> new file, and the fourth
* Robin Holt h...@sgi.com wrote:
I have the patches sort-of finished. The patch set starts by
moving the halt/shutdown/reboot functions over to a new
kernel/reboot.c, next patch gets a checkpatch.pl cleanup to
work, third patch is essentially the below patch against the
new file, and the
On 04/15, Robin Holt wrote:
>
> On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 06:30:22PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 04/12, Robin Holt wrote:
> > >
> > > +void migrate_to_boot_cpu(void)
> > > +{
> > > + /* The boot cpu is always logical cpu 0 */
> > > + int reboot_cpu_id = 0;
> > > +
> > > + /* Make certain the
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 11:04:08AM -0500, Robin Holt wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 06:30:22PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 04/12, Robin Holt wrote:
> > >
> > > +void migrate_to_boot_cpu(void)
> > > +{
> > > + /* The boot cpu is always logical cpu 0 */
> > > + int reboot_cpu_id = 0;
> > >
On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 06:30:22PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 04/12, Robin Holt wrote:
> >
> > +void migrate_to_boot_cpu(void)
> > +{
> > + /* The boot cpu is always logical cpu 0 */
> > + int reboot_cpu_id = 0;
> > +
> > + /* Make certain the cpu I'm about to reboot on is online */
>
I have the patches sort-of finished. The patch set starts by
moving the halt/shutdown/reboot functions over to a new
kernel/reboot.c, next patch gets a checkpatch.pl cleanup to
work, third patch is essentially the below patch against the
new file, and the fourth patch introduces a kernel boot
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 12:16:44PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Robin Holt wrote:
>
> > From 1767003c943325e52ac78cac6fdbaf2ab63d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > From: Robin Holt
> > Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2013 13:52:00 -0500
> > Subject: [PATCH] Migrate shutdown/reboot to boot cpu.
> >
> > We
* Robin Holt wrote:
> From 1767003c943325e52ac78cac6fdbaf2ab63d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Robin Holt
> Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2013 13:52:00 -0500
> Subject: [PATCH] Migrate shutdown/reboot to boot cpu.
>
> We recently noticed that reboot of a 1024 cpu machine takes approx 16
> minutes of
* Robin Holt h...@sgi.com wrote:
From 1767003c943325e52ac78cac6fdbaf2ab63d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Robin Holt h...@sgi.com
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2013 13:52:00 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] Migrate shutdown/reboot to boot cpu.
We recently noticed that reboot of a 1024 cpu machine takes
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 12:16:44PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Robin Holt h...@sgi.com wrote:
From 1767003c943325e52ac78cac6fdbaf2ab63d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Robin Holt h...@sgi.com
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2013 13:52:00 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] Migrate shutdown/reboot to boot cpu.
I have the patches sort-of finished. The patch set starts by
moving the halt/shutdown/reboot functions over to a new
kernel/reboot.c, next patch gets a checkpatch.pl cleanup to
work, third patch is essentially the below patch against the
new file, and the fourth patch introduces a kernel boot
On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 06:30:22PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 04/12, Robin Holt wrote:
+void migrate_to_boot_cpu(void)
+{
+ /* The boot cpu is always logical cpu 0 */
+ int reboot_cpu_id = 0;
+
+ /* Make certain the cpu I'm about to reboot on is online */
+ if
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 11:04:08AM -0500, Robin Holt wrote:
On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 06:30:22PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 04/12, Robin Holt wrote:
+void migrate_to_boot_cpu(void)
+{
+ /* The boot cpu is always logical cpu 0 */
+ int reboot_cpu_id = 0;
+
+ /* Make
On 04/15, Robin Holt wrote:
On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 06:30:22PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
On 04/12, Robin Holt wrote:
+void migrate_to_boot_cpu(void)
+{
+ /* The boot cpu is always logical cpu 0 */
+ int reboot_cpu_id = 0;
+
+ /* Make certain the cpu I'm about to reboot
On 04/12/2013 03:01 PM, Robin Holt wrote:
> kernel/sys.c | 17 +++--
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sys.c b/kernel/sys.c
> index 0da73cf..4d1047d 100644
> --- a/kernel/sys.c
> +++ b/kernel/sys.c
> @@ -357,6 +357,19 @@ int
On 04/12, Robin Holt wrote:
>
> +void migrate_to_boot_cpu(void)
> +{
> + /* The boot cpu is always logical cpu 0 */
> + int reboot_cpu_id = 0;
> +
> + /* Make certain the cpu I'm about to reboot on is online */
> + if (!cpu_online(reboot_cpu_id))
> + reboot_cpu_id =
On 04/12, Robin Holt wrote:
+void migrate_to_boot_cpu(void)
+{
+ /* The boot cpu is always logical cpu 0 */
+ int reboot_cpu_id = 0;
+
+ /* Make certain the cpu I'm about to reboot on is online */
+ if (!cpu_online(reboot_cpu_id))
+ reboot_cpu_id =
On 04/12/2013 03:01 PM, Robin Holt wrote:
kernel/sys.c | 17 +++--
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/sys.c b/kernel/sys.c
index 0da73cf..4d1047d 100644
--- a/kernel/sys.c
+++ b/kernel/sys.c
@@ -357,6 +357,19 @@ int
Meant to send this to Shawn. Too early in the morning.
Robin
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 04:31:49AM -0500, Robin Holt wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 11:39:51AM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> > On 04/12/2013 11:07 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > >
> > > * Robin Holt wrote:
> > >
> > >> For the
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 11:39:51AM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> On 04/12/2013 11:07 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Robin Holt wrote:
> >
> >> For the v3.9 release, can we consider my awful patch?
> >
> > How about trying what I suggested, to make reboot affine to the boot CPU
> >
On 04/12/2013 11:07 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Robin Holt wrote:
>
>> For the v3.9 release, can we consider my awful patch?
>
> How about trying what I suggested, to make reboot affine to the boot CPU
> explicitly, not by shutting down all the other CPUs, but by
> set_cpus_allowed() or
>
On 04/12/2013 11:07 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Robin Holt h...@sgi.com wrote:
For the v3.9 release, can we consider my awful patch?
How about trying what I suggested, to make reboot affine to the boot CPU
explicitly, not by shutting down all the other CPUs, but by
set_cpus_allowed() or
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 11:39:51AM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
On 04/12/2013 11:07 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Robin Holt h...@sgi.com wrote:
For the v3.9 release, can we consider my awful patch?
How about trying what I suggested, to make reboot affine to the boot CPU
Meant to send this to Shawn. Too early in the morning.
Robin
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 04:31:49AM -0500, Robin Holt wrote:
On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 11:39:51AM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
On 04/12/2013 11:07 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Robin Holt h...@sgi.com wrote:
For the v3.9
* Robin Holt wrote:
> For the v3.9 release, can we consider my awful patch?
How about trying what I suggested, to make reboot affine to the boot CPU
explicitly, not by shutting down all the other CPUs, but by set_cpus_allowed()
or
so?
That should solve the regression, without the ugly
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 03:08:20PM -0500, Russ Anderson wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 08:15:27PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> > On 04/11/2013 07:53 PM, Russ Anderson wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 06:15:18PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> > >>
> > >> One more thing we have to note
On 04/12/2013 01:38 AM, Russ Anderson wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 08:15:27PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
>> On 04/11/2013 07:53 PM, Russ Anderson wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 06:15:18PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
One more thing we have to note is that, there are 4
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 08:15:27PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> On 04/11/2013 07:53 PM, Russ Anderson wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 06:15:18PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> >>
> >> One more thing we have to note is that, there are 4 notifiers for taking a
> >> CPU offline:
> >>
> >>
On 04/11/2013 07:53 PM, Russ Anderson wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 06:15:18PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
>> On 04/11/2013 11:01 AM, Paul Mackerras wrote:
>>> On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 08:10:05AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
The optimal solution would be to just speed up the
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 06:15:18PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> On 04/11/2013 11:01 AM, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 08:10:05AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >> The optimal solution would be to just speed up the
> >> disable_nonboot_cpus() code so much that it isn't an
For the v3.9 release, can we consider my awful patch?
Thanks,
Robin
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 06:15:18PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> On 04/11/2013 11:01 AM, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 08:10:05AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >> The optimal solution would be to just
On 04/11/2013 11:01 AM, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 08:10:05AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> The optimal solution would be to just speed up the
>> disable_nonboot_cpus() code so much that it isn't an issue. That would
>> be good for suspending too, although I guess suspend
On 04/11/2013 11:01 AM, Paul Mackerras wrote:
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 08:10:05AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
The optimal solution would be to just speed up the
disable_nonboot_cpus() code so much that it isn't an issue. That would
be good for suspending too, although I guess suspend isn't a
For the v3.9 release, can we consider my awful patch?
Thanks,
Robin
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 06:15:18PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
On 04/11/2013 11:01 AM, Paul Mackerras wrote:
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 08:10:05AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
The optimal solution would be to just speed up
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 06:15:18PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
On 04/11/2013 11:01 AM, Paul Mackerras wrote:
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 08:10:05AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
The optimal solution would be to just speed up the
disable_nonboot_cpus() code so much that it isn't an issue. That
On 04/11/2013 07:53 PM, Russ Anderson wrote:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 06:15:18PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
On 04/11/2013 11:01 AM, Paul Mackerras wrote:
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 08:10:05AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
The optimal solution would be to just speed up the
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 08:15:27PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
On 04/11/2013 07:53 PM, Russ Anderson wrote:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 06:15:18PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
One more thing we have to note is that, there are 4 notifiers for taking a
CPU offline:
CPU_DOWN_PREPARE
On 04/12/2013 01:38 AM, Russ Anderson wrote:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 08:15:27PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
On 04/11/2013 07:53 PM, Russ Anderson wrote:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 06:15:18PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
One more thing we have to note is that, there are 4 notifiers for
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 03:08:20PM -0500, Russ Anderson wrote:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 08:15:27PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
On 04/11/2013 07:53 PM, Russ Anderson wrote:
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 06:15:18PM +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
One more thing we have to note is that, there
* Robin Holt h...@sgi.com wrote:
For the v3.9 release, can we consider my awful patch?
How about trying what I suggested, to make reboot affine to the boot CPU
explicitly, not by shutting down all the other CPUs, but by set_cpus_allowed()
or
so?
That should solve the regression, without
40 matches
Mail list logo
