Hi Stefano,
On 30/05/2016 15:45, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Mon, 23 May 2016, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi Stefano,
On 21/05/16 16:09, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Thu, 5 May 2016, Julien Grall wrote:
+void __init apply_alternatives_all(void)
+{
+ int ret;
+
+ /* better not try code patching on a live SMP system */
+ ret = stop_machine_run(__apply_alternatives_multi_stop, NULL,
NR_CPUS);
Why not just call stop_machine_run, passing 0 as the cpu to run
__apply_alternatives_multi_stop on? Given that you already have
secondary cpus spinning in __apply_alternatives_multi_stop. What am I
missing?
Someone as to call __apply_alternatives_multi_stop on secondary CPUs.
Why? Secondary cpus would be just left spinning at the beginning of the
function. You might as well leave them spinning in
stopmachine_wait_state.
Because, we may need to patch the stop_machine state machine
(spinlock,...). So the safest place whilst the code is patched is
__apply_alternatives_multi_stop.
Note that there is a comment on top of __apply_alternatives_multi_stop
to explain the reason.
Regards,
--
Julien Grall
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
