[lkml]   [2018]   [Jul]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] ARM64: smp: BUG() if smp_send_reschedule() is called for an offline cpu
On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 03:12:49PM -0700, Venkata Narendra Kumar Gutta wrote:
> Based on the 'commit <8b775be35e41b9f> ("ARM: smp:
> BUG() if smp_send_reschedule() is called for an offline cpu")'

This commit does not appear to exist in mainline. Which tree is it in?

> Sending an IPI_RESCHEDULE to an offline CPU is incorrect and potentially
> bad for both power and stability. On some sub-architectures such as MSM,
> if a power-collapsed CPU is unexpectedly woken up by an IPI, it will be
> begin executing without the preparations that would normally happen as
> part of CPU_UP_PREPARE. If clocks, voltage regulators, or other hardware
> configuration are not performed, the booting CPU may cause general
> instability or (at best) poor power performance since the CPU would be
> powered up but not utilized.
> One common cause for such issues is misuse of add_timer_on() or APIs
> such as queue_work_on() which call it. If proper precautions are not
> taken to block hotplug while these APIs are called then a race may
> result in IPIs being sent to CPUs that are already offline.
> This same argument could be applied to other IPIs (with the exception
> of IPI_WAKEUP), but the others are already restricted to only online
> CPUs by existing mechanisms, so an explicit assertion is not useful.
> Signed-off-by: Matt Wagantall <>
> Signed-off-by: Trilok Soni <>
> Signed-off-by: Venkata Narendra Kumar Gutta <>
> ---
> arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
> index 2faa986..5e39030 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
> @@ -898,6 +898,7 @@ void handle_IPI(int ipinr, struct pt_regs *regs)
> void smp_send_reschedule(int cpu)
> {
> + BUG_ON(cpu_is_offline(cpu));
> smp_cross_call(cpumask_of(cpu), IPI_RESCHEDULE);
> }

Is BUG_ON() appropriate?

Why not WARN_ON() and return?

AFAICT, arm doesn't have this logic today either.


 \ /
  Last update: 2018-07-20 08:32    [W:0.040 / U:0.096 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site