On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 12:47:38PM +0200, Sasha Levin wrote:
> I'm just wondering about the status of the patches to fix this issue,
> this is still happening on linux-next.
I got distracted with other stuff. I have been running code that does the
following in the shutdown path:
foreach_online_cpu
cpu_down
but I get occasional hangs on reboot that I haven't gotten around to
debugging. I assumed this is the approach Peter was suggesting though I
don't think he was sure if it was going to be reliable.
Cheers,
Don
>
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 11:04 PM, Don Zickus <dzickus@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 09:36:03PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >> On Fri, 2012-02-10 at 15:31 -0500, Don Zickus wrote:
> >> > So my second patch which I will eventually post will just skip the WARN_ON
> >> > if the system is going down. Not sure if that is the proper way to address
> >> > this problem or change all of the stop_this_cpu code to use a different
> >> > bitmask than the cpu_online bitmask (but then you run the risk of a stuck
> >> > IPI I guess if the cpu is halted without notifying anyone).
> >>
> >> Yeah, the async hard kill of all cpus is bound to make problems.. what
> >> I'm wondering is, why is this in the normal shutdown path and not
> >> specific to a hard panic?
> >
> > I didn't write the original code, I just changed it from REBOOT_IRQ to
> > NMI and left all the stop_this_cpu stuff alone.
> >
> >>
> >> Trying to make this work is just not going to be pretty, and in the
> >> panic case we really don't care much.
> >
> > Sure.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Don
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
