Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752476AbdGEJEr (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Jul 2017 05:04:47 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([65.50.211.133]:58074 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751925AbdGEJEq (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Jul 2017 05:04:46 -0400 Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 11:04:40 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: Vikram Mulukutla , Rusty Russell , Tejun Heo , Andrew Morton , LKML , Sebastian Sewior Subject: Re: [PATCH] smp/hotplug: Move unparking of percpu threads to the control CPU Message-ID: <20170705090440.hxnpsj2pgxykg3t6@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2294 Lines: 88 On Tue, Jul 04, 2017 at 10:20:23PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > --- a/kernel/cpu.c > +++ b/kernel/cpu.c > @@ -271,11 +271,25 @@ void cpu_hotplug_enable(void) > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cpu_hotplug_enable); > #endif /* CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU */ > > +static void __cpuhp_kick_ap_work(struct cpuhp_cpu_state *st); > + > static int bringup_wait_for_ap(unsigned int cpu) > { > struct cpuhp_cpu_state *st = per_cpu_ptr(&cpuhp_state, cpu); > > + /* Wait for the CPU to reach IDLE_ONLINE */ > wait_for_completion(&st->done); > + BUG_ON(!cpu_online(cpu)); > + > + /* Unpark the stopper thread and the hotplug thread of the target cpu */ > + stop_machine_unpark(cpu); > + kthread_unpark(st->thread); > + > + /* Should we go further up ? */ > + if (st->target > CPUHP_AP_ONLINE_IDLE) { > + __cpuhp_kick_ap_work(st); > + wait_for_completion(&st->done); > + } > return st->result; > } > > @@ -296,9 +310,7 @@ static int bringup_cpu(unsigned int cpu) > irq_unlock_sparse(); > if (ret) > return ret; > - ret = bringup_wait_for_ap(cpu); > - BUG_ON(!cpu_online(cpu)); > - return ret; > + return bringup_wait_for_ap(cpu); > } > > /* > @@ -775,23 +787,13 @@ void notify_cpu_starting(unsigned int cp The comment right above this function now seems stale.. > void cpuhp_online_idle(enum cpuhp_state state) > { > struct cpuhp_cpu_state *st = this_cpu_ptr(&cpuhp_state); > - unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id(); > > /* Happens for the boot cpu */ > if (state != CPUHP_AP_ONLINE_IDLE) > return; > > st->state = CPUHP_AP_ONLINE_IDLE; > - > - /* Unpark the stopper thread and the hotplug thread of this cpu */ > - stop_machine_unpark(cpu); > - kthread_unpark(st->thread); > - > - /* Should we go further up ? */ > - if (st->target > CPUHP_AP_ONLINE_IDLE) > - __cpuhp_kick_ap_work(st); > - else > - complete(&st->done); > + complete(&st->done); > } OK, so if I get this right we do something like: BP AP bringup_cpu(); __cpu_up() ------------> /* stuff */ bringup_wait_for_ap() wait_for_completion(); cpuhp_online_idle(); <------------ complete(&st->done); unpark() while(1) do_idle(); Where you moved the unpark() from the AP's idle thread to the BP's context and thus allow scheduling etc.. Yes that should work fine I think.