Re: [BUGFIX][PATCH] Freezer, CPU hotplug, x86 Microcode: Fix taskfreezing failures
From: Tejun Heo
Date: Tue Oct 04 2011 - 03:15:18 EST
On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 10:47:54AM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> I think your patch makes sense because re-loading the ucode during
> a suspend/resume cycle is unnecessary. If one wants to update the
> microcode, it should happen later when the box is resumed again: you
> simply put the new microcode image in /lib/firmware/... and on AMD
> unload/reload the microcode module and on Intel you do either that or
> use the deprecated microcode_ctl.
I don't think it changes anything for suspend/resume cycles. They're
different hooks. The proposed patch changes actual cpu hotplug paths.
> However, let me test it on a couple of AMD boxes tomorrow to verify.
> > At the moment I can't think of any clean solution that solves both these problems -
> > a. The problem of requesting microcode from userspace when it is frozen (which can be individually
> > solved by my patch).
> > b. The possible need for a revised microcode during CPU online (due to the remote usecase of
> > physically plugging-out and plugging-in a new CPU), when the tasks are frozen.
> Yeah, let me remind you guys, we're talking about x86 CPUs here. AFAICT,
> I don't think that physical unplug is supported by any vendor yet but
> I'd welcome surprises :-).
I recall hearing about someone experimenting with actual hotplug a
while ago. Dunno whether that was production or not tho. Even if
not, given the continuing penetration of x86 into highend, I don't
think it would take too long to see physical CPU hotplug in
production. Also, it just is a poor engineering.
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/