Re: [PATCH 3/3] v4: Add support for Numascale's NumaChip

From: Ingo Molnar
Date: Mon Dec 05 2011 - 04:12:26 EST



* Daniel J Blueman <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> From: Steffen Persvold <sp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> v2:
> - [Steffen] enumerate only accessible northbridges
> - [Daniel] rediffed and validated against 3.1-rc10
>
> v3:
> - [Daniel] use x86_init core numbering override
> - [Daniel] cleanups as per feedback
>
> v4:
> - [Daniel] use updated x86_cpuinit override
>
> Signed-off-by: Steffen Persvold <sp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel J Blueman <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/x86/Kconfig | 12 +
> arch/x86/include/asm/numachip/numachip_csr.h | 167 ++++++++++++++
> arch/x86/kernel/apic/Makefile | 1 +
> arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic_numachip.c | 312 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 4 files changed, 492 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 arch/x86/include/asm/numachip/numachip_csr.h
> create mode 100644 arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic_numachip.c

The patches are now structured mostly right and look clean.

Other small details i noticed:

> +static int numachip_system;
> +
> +static struct apic apic_numachip;

Those want to be __read_mostly - this also makes them more NUMA
friendly .

> +static int __cpuinit numachip_wakeup_secondary(int phys_apicid, unsigned long start_rip)
> +{
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> + union numachip_csr_g3_ext_irq_gen int_gen;
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + int_gen.s._destination_apic_id = phys_apicid;
> + int_gen.s._vector = 0;
> + int_gen.s._msgtype = APIC_DM_INIT >> 8;
> + int_gen.s._index = 0;
> +
> + local_irq_save(flags);
> + write_lcsr(CSR_G3_EXT_IRQ_GEN, int_gen.v);
> + local_irq_restore(flags);
> +
> + mdelay(10);

Exactly why does it have to sleep 10 milliseconds here? Please
document it.

> +
> + int_gen.s._msgtype = APIC_DM_STARTUP >> 8;
> + int_gen.s._vector = start_rip >> 12;
> +
> + local_irq_save(flags);
> + write_lcsr(CSR_G3_EXT_IRQ_GEN, int_gen.v);
> + local_irq_restore(flags);
> +
> + atomic_set(&init_deasserted, 1);
> +#endif
> + return 0;

You could do a 'depends on SMP' and stop uglifying the code with
!SMP considerations. Unless a single-core installation with a UP
kernel is possible and desired.

> +static void numachip_send_IPI_allbutself(int vector)
> +{
> + unsigned int this_cpu = smp_processor_id();
> + unsigned int cpu;
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + local_irq_save(flags);
> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> + if (cpu != this_cpu)
> + numachip_send_IPI_one(cpu, vector);
> + }
> + local_irq_restore(flags);
> +}

This seems preempt unsafe: you take smp_processor_id() before
disabling hardirqs.

Thanks,

Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/