Date:   Wed, 15 Feb 2023 11:45:38 -0800
From:   Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>
To:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc:     Philippe =?utf-8?Q?Mathieu-Daud=C3=A9?= <philmd@linaro.org>,
        juri.lelli@redhat.com, dalias@libc.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
        catalin.marinas@arm.com, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com,
        x86@kernel.org, jiaxun.yang@flygoat.com,
        linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, bsegall@google.com, jcmvbkbc@gmail.com,
        guoren@kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org,
        kernel@xen0n.name, will@kernel.org, vschneid@redhat.com,
        f.fainelli@gmail.com, vincent.guittot@linaro.org,
        ysato@users.sourceforge.jp, chenhuacai@kernel.org,
        linux@armlinux.org.uk, linux-csky@vger.kernel.org,
        dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, mingo@redhat.com,
        bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com, mgorman@suse.de,
        mattst88@gmail.com, linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org,
        paulmck@kernel.org, richard.henderson@linaro.org,
        npiggin@gmail.com, ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru, rostedt@goodmis.org,
        loongarch@lists.linux.dev, tglx@linutronix.de,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, jgross@suse.com,
        chris@zankel.net, tsbogend@alpha.franken.de, bristot@redhat.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org,
        bp@alien8.de, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, davem@davemloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/24] arm64/cpu: Mark cpu_die() __noreturn
Message-ID: <20230215194538.aiiris3uabnuvkkg@treble>
References: <cover.1676358308.git.jpoimboe@kernel.org>
 <e47fc487980d5330e6059ac6e16416bec88cda0e.1676358308.git.jpoimboe@kernel.org>
 <14274f04-2991-95bd-c29b-07e86e8755c1@linaro.org>
 <Y+zZgZIP7RPIgyQf@FVFF77S0Q05N>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <Y+zZgZIP7RPIgyQf@FVFF77S0Q05N>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 01:09:21PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 09:13:08AM +0100, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> > On 14/2/23 08:05, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > > cpu_die() doesn't return.  Annotate it as such.  By extension this also
> > > makes arch_cpu_idle_dead() noreturn.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>
> > > ---
> > >   arch/arm64/include/asm/smp.h | 2 +-
> > >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/smp.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/smp.h
> > > index fc55f5a57a06..5733a31bab08 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/smp.h
> > > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/smp.h
> > > @@ -100,7 +100,7 @@ static inline void arch_send_wakeup_ipi_mask(const struct cpumask *mask)
> > >   extern int __cpu_disable(void);
> > >   extern void __cpu_die(unsigned int cpu);
> > > -extern void cpu_die(void);
> > > +extern void __noreturn cpu_die(void);
> > >   extern void cpu_die_early(void);
> > 
> > Shouldn't cpu_operations::cpu_die() be declared noreturn first?
> 
> The cpu_die() function ends with a BUG(), and so does not return, even if a
> cpu_operations::cpu_die() function that it calls erroneously returned.
> 
> We *could* mark cpu_operations::cpu_die() as noreturn, but I'd prefer that we
> did not so that the compiler doesn't optimize away the BUG() which is there to
> catch such erroneous returns.
> 
> That said, could we please add __noreturn to the implementation of cpu_die() in
> arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c? i.e. the fixup below.

Done.

> With that fixup:
> 
> Acked-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>

Thanks!

-- 
Josh