Commit 62be9001 authored by Satyam Sharma's avatar Satyam Sharma Committed by Linus Torvalds

i386: Fix a couple busy loops in mach_wakecpu.h:wait_for_init_deassert()

Use cpu_relax() in the busy loops, as atomic_read() doesn't automatically
imply volatility for i386 and x86_64. x86_64 doesn't have this issue because
it open-codes the while loop in smpboot.c:smp_callin() itself that already
uses cpu_relax().

For i386, however, smpboot.c:smp_callin() calls wait_for_init_deassert()
which is buggy for mach-default and mach-es7000 cases.

[ I test-built a kernel -- smp_callin() itself got inlined in its only
  callsite, smpboot.c:start_secondary() -- and the relevant piece of
  code disassembles to the following:

0xc1019704 <start_secondary+12>:        mov    0xc144c4c8,%eax
0xc1019709 <start_secondary+17>:        test   %eax,%eax
0xc101970b <start_secondary+19>:        je     0xc1019709 <start_secondary+17>

  init_deasserted (at 0xc144c4c8) gets fetched into %eax only once and
  then we loop over the test of the stale value in the register only,
  so these look like real bugs to me. With the fix below, this becomes:

0xc1019706 <start_secondary+14>:        pause
0xc1019708 <start_secondary+16>:        cmpl   $0x0,0xc144c4c8
0xc101970f <start_secondary+23>:        je     0xc1019706 <start_secondary+14>

  which looks nice and healthy. ]

Thanks to Heiko Carstens for noticing this.
Signed-off-by: default avatarSatyam Sharma <satyam@infradead.org>
Cc: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
parent 06bfb7eb
......@@ -15,7 +15,8 @@
static inline void wait_for_init_deassert(atomic_t *deassert)
{
while (!atomic_read(deassert));
while (!atomic_read(deassert))
cpu_relax();
return;
}
......
......@@ -31,7 +31,8 @@ wakeup_secondary_cpu(int phys_apicid, unsigned long start_eip)
static inline void wait_for_init_deassert(atomic_t *deassert)
{
#ifdef WAKE_SECONDARY_VIA_INIT
while (!atomic_read(deassert));
while (!atomic_read(deassert))
cpu_relax();
#endif
return;
}
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment