Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754811AbbGPJjQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jul 2015 05:39:16 -0400 Received: from pandora.arm.linux.org.uk ([78.32.30.218]:46303 "EHLO pandora.arm.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754136AbbGPJjP (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jul 2015 05:39:15 -0400 Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 10:39:02 +0100 From: Russell King - ARM Linux To: Daniel Thompson Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] ARM: add basic support for on-demand backtrace of other CPUs Message-ID: <20150716093901.GJ7557@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <20150715203911.GF7557@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <55A775B6.8080505@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <55A775B6.8080505@linaro.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1942 Lines: 47 On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 10:13:26AM +0100, Daniel Thompson wrote: > On 15/07/15 21:39, Russell King wrote: > >As we now have generic infrastructure to support backtracing of other > >CPUs in the system on lockups, we can start to implement this for ARM. > >Initially, we add an IPI based implementation, as the GIC code needs > >modification to support the generation of FIQ IPIs, and not all ARM > >platforms have the ability to raise a FIQ in the non-secure world. > > > >This provides us with a "best efforts" implementation in the absence > >of FIQs. > > > >Signed-off-by: Russell King > >--- > >diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/smp.c b/arch/arm/kernel/smp.c > >index 90dfbedfbfb8..3a20c386fd33 100644 > >--- a/arch/arm/kernel/smp.c > >+++ b/arch/arm/kernel/smp.c > >@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@ > > #include > > #include > > #include > >+#include > > #include > > #include > > #include > >@@ -72,6 +73,7 @@ enum ipi_msg_type { > > IPI_CPU_STOP, > > IPI_IRQ_WORK, > > IPI_COMPLETION, > >+ IPI_CPU_BACKTRACE = 15, > > Even with the potential for (eventually) being signalled by FIQ, is this IPI > really so special it needs to be placed outside the scope of NR_IPI and the > accounting and tracing support it brings with it? That's exactly why it's placed outside that range. We don't want the accounting and tracing stuff at all in that path - that's more code which needs to be run which could be the cause of the lockup. More fragility. -- FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 10.5Mbps down 400kbps up according to speedtest.net. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/