Date:   Sat, 25 Feb 2023 22:19:56 +0000
From:   David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
To:     Usama Arif <usama.arif@bytedance.com>,
        Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>,
        Yuan Yao <yuan.yao@linux.intel.com>
CC:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Subject: =?US-ASCII?Q?Re=3A_=5BExternal=5D_=5BPATCH_v2_0/5=5D_x86-6?= =?US-ASCII?Q?4=3A_Remove_global_variables_from_boot?=
User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android
In-Reply-To: <d6d4096c-2373-aafc-ed17-e44e351e66e1@bytedance.com>
References: <20230224154235.277350-1-brgerst@gmail.com> <cfdb9c5a-4723-d920-511e-b57ae6c492f7@bytedance.com> <CAMzpN2hvPHWYOeyzfpRmk39XYwCrSJx0UyqxE48F1TjTNyoKAg@mail.gmail.com> <ca5788873c373249983ab6ac9ee173b12293641e.camel@infradead.org> <CAMzpN2ixYTKQaNoizkeNBrHQH_2SN9OMexnK9t3oVMDDCMwbOA@mail.gmail.com> <E940A2E7-6FAC-4E87-96DE-596BA3F505AF@infradead.org> <671dc8ad-2721-a3a3-7aa2-0e2558d5c953@bytedance.com> <1c64afc8769c222e27ee22a3758b6c32348949d0.camel@infradead.org> <d6d4096c-2373-aafc-ed17-e44e351e66e1@bytedance.com>
Message-ID: <B1B02751-035E-478E-8A3B-FA4F852321CC@infradead.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk


On 25 February 2023 22:15:02 GMT, Usama Arif <usama=2Earif@bytedance=2Ecom=
> wrote:
>
>
>On 25/02/2023 13:52, David Woodhouse wrote:
>> On Sat, 2023-02-25 at 13:33 +0000, Usama Arif wrote:
>>>=20
>>> Yeah looks good! I am testing with the macro diff for tr_lock from
>>> https://lore=2Ekernel=2Eorg/all/05e27a7a-1faa-944e-2764-6ab4d620fb8f@b=
ytedance=2Ecom/=2E
>>> If it all works, happy for me to send out v12 with it?
>>=20
>> I moved the macro definition up a little to put it between the =2Ecode1=
6
>> and the =2Ealign, pushed it out as a commit on top of the above branch=
=2E
>>=20
>> We'll collapse it into the 'Support parallel startup' patch, yes?
>>=20
>
>Yes, collapsed with "Support parallel startup of secondary CPUs" patch=2E=
 I think Thomas' solution to dealing with suspend might be better? So I was=
 thinking of sending v12 on top of v6=2E2 release with the following diff o=
ver your branch (merged in the right commit ofcourse):

Nah, I think I prefer it as I had it=2E The new comment says it all=2E

>-       /*
>-        * Ensure the CPU knows which one it is when it comes back, if
>-        * it isn't in parallel mode and expected to work that out for
>-        * itself=2E
>-        */
>-       if (!(smpboot_control & STARTUP_PARALLEL_MASK))
>-               smpboot_control =3D smp_processor_id();

And since Brian's patches there is no "boot mode" any more=2E

>+       /* Force the startup into boot mode */