Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Thu, 17 Jan 2019 23:20:38 -0800
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To:     Atish Patra <atish.patra@wdc.com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
        Patrick =?iso-8859-1?Q?St=E4hlin?= <me@packi.ch>,
        Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
        Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>,
        Alan Kao <alankao@andestech.com>,
        Dmitriy Cherkasov <dmitriy@oss-tech.org>,
        Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Michael Clark <michaeljclark@mac.com>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>,
        Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de>,
        "linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Zong Li <zongbox@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/8] RISC-V: Do not wait indefinitely in __cpu_up
Message-ID: <20190118072038.GA5171@infradead.org>
References: <1546940318-9752-1-git-send-email-atish.patra@wdc.com>
 <1546940318-9752-2-git-send-email-atish.patra@wdc.com>
 <20190115135125.GA28946@infradead.org>
 <1995e941-a8cf-c12e-71ae-7b50cf6c0ca5@wdc.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1995e941-a8cf-c12e-71ae-7b50cf6c0ca5@wdc.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 06:35:39PM -0800, Atish Patra wrote:
> On 1/15/19 5:51 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > >   void *__cpu_up_stack_pointer[NR_CPUS];
> > >   void *__cpu_up_task_pointer[NR_CPUS];
> > > +static DECLARE_COMPLETION(cpu_running);
> > >   void __init smp_prepare_boot_cpu(void)
> > >   {
> > > @@ -81,6 +82,7 @@ void __init setup_smp(void)
> > >   int __cpu_up(unsigned int cpu, struct task_struct *tidle)
> > >   {
> > > +	int ret = 0;
> > >   	int hartid = cpuid_to_hartid_map(cpu);
> > >   	tidle->thread_info.cpu = cpu;
> > > @@ -96,10 +98,15 @@ int __cpu_up(unsigned int cpu, struct task_struct *tidle)
> > >   		  task_stack_page(tidle) + THREAD_SIZE);
> > >   	WRITE_ONCE(__cpu_up_task_pointer[hartid], tidle);
> > > -	while (!cpu_online(cpu))
> > > -		cpu_relax();
> > > +	wait_for_completion_timeout(&cpu_running,
> > > +					    msecs_to_jiffies(1000));
> > 
> > Having a global completion here worries me.  I bet we have some higher
> > level serialization, but can we comment or even better lockdep assert on
> > that?
> > 
> 
> Yes. It is serialized from smp.c in smp_init(). It brings one cpu online
> at a time for preset_cpu mask.
> 
> Do we still need a lockdep assert ?

I guess the real lock is through cpu_hotplug_lock.  And yes, a comment
or even better lockdep assert would be good.