Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756869AbXI1Nql (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Sep 2007 09:46:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752045AbXI1Nqe (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Sep 2007 09:46:34 -0400 Received: from rtr.ca ([76.10.145.34]:2055 "EHLO mail.rtr.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751145AbXI1Nqe (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Sep 2007 09:46:34 -0400 Message-ID: <46FD05B8.2040302@rtr.ca> Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 09:46:32 -0400 From: Mark Lord User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Len Brown , Linux Kernel , simon.derr@bull.net Subject: Re: Problems with SMP & ACPI powering off References: <46FC20B7.4000606@rtr.ca> <200709281455.29069.rjw@sisk.pl> <46FD001A.3070309@rtr.ca> <200709281544.30497.rjw@sisk.pl> In-Reply-To: <200709281544.30497.rjw@sisk.pl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1718 Lines: 40 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday, 28 September 2007 15:22, Mark Lord wrote: >> Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>> On Friday, 28 September 2007 06:57, Len Brown wrote: >>>> On Thursday 27 September 2007 18:00, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>>>> On Thursday, 27 September 2007 23:29, Mark Lord wrote: >>>>>> Question: do we disable all CPUs except 0 when doing ACPI power off? >>>>> No, but we should. >>>> We used to. >>>> It is absolutely mandatory -- else it confuses the BIOS on some boards >>>> b/c it isn't expecting SMM to get entered from other than cpu0. >>> Can we use the CPU hotplug for that, like in the suspend/hibernation case? >> Well, so far it's working: about ten poweroffs since I patched it, >> and no issues with any of them. Prior to that, it seemed like about >> one in five poweroffs wouldn't (power off). >> >> It'll take a lot more testing to confirm, though. >> >> What can I call to determine if more than one CPU is enabled, anyway? >> >> Here's the hack I'm using here, very situation (2 cores) specific, >> and it still has some printk's leftover with a sleep so I have time >> to read them before the lights go out. :) > > Well, we have disable_nonboot_cpus() that we use for suspend and that is > supposed to be general. > > The question is when to call it. How about from the obvious candidate: kernel/sys.c::kernel_power_off() ? I'll rework my hack into a proper patch there, repost it here, and test with it for another day or two. -ml - 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/