public inbox for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org 
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: marc.zyngier@arm•com (Marc Zyngier)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists•infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] ARM: irq_work: Do not attempt to IPI on non IPI-capable HW
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 09:08:48 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <57B41B90.3050204@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <VI1PR04MB1455E9F56D0EDA0558CC84508B140@VI1PR04MB1455.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>

On 17/08/16 08:58, Peter Chen wrote:
>  
>> On 17/08/16 04:15, Peter Chen wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 11:26 PM, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm•com>
>> wrote:
>>>> Not all of the ARM HW is IPI capable (i.e. most of the non-SMP
>>>> systems). Unfortunately, some systems do advertise being SMP capable,
>>>> even if they have a single core and do not define a cross call
>>>> method.
>>>
>>> Could you example it? I find all current set_smp_cross_call is defined
>>> under CONFIG_SMP.
>>
>> This doesn't mean that the system will be SMP at runtime (SMP_ON_UP).
>>
>  
> I am puzzled that how you would like to check IPI capable, at runtime
> or according to kernel configuration?
> 
>>>>
>>>>  static inline bool arch_irq_work_has_interrupt(void)  {
>>>> -       return is_smp();
>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
>>>
>>> Why not using is_smp as condition, it is more strict.
>>>
>>> if (is_smp())
>>>     return !!__smp_cross_call;
>>> else
>>>     return false;
>>
>> What's the gain? We're trying to check whether we can actually deliver
>> an IPI. Why should we gate it by finding out whether we're smp_on_up or not?
>>
> 
> If UP system with CONFIG_SMP enabled, the __smp_cross_call is not
> NULL, but the IPI is not capable. Or am I missing something?

Take an OMAP3 system. It is UP,  and doesn't have a GIC, so
__smp_cross_call will be NULL. Yet, it boots with a generic
multi-platform kernel, with SMP on.

Thanks,

	M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

  reply	other threads:[~2016-08-17  8:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-08-16 15:26 [PATCH] ARM: irq_work: Do not attempt to IPI on non IPI-capable HW Marc Zyngier
2016-08-16 15:52 ` Fabio Estevam
2016-08-16 16:03   ` Marc Zyngier
2016-08-17  3:15 ` Peter Chen
2016-08-17  7:41   ` Marc Zyngier
2016-08-17  7:58     ` Peter Chen
2016-08-17  8:08       ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2016-08-17  8:28         ` Peter Chen
2016-08-17  9:19           ` Marc Zyngier
2016-08-17 11:27             ` Peter Chen
2016-08-17 12:57               ` Marc Zyngier
2016-08-17 13:28                 ` Fabio Estevam
2016-08-30 17:03 ` Marc Zyngier

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=57B41B90.3050204@arm.com \
    --to=marc.zyngier@arm$(echo .)com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists$(echo .)infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox