On 2016-08-01 15:11, Claudio Fontana wrote:
> On 31 July 2016 at 10:39, Jan Kiszka <jan.kis...@web.de> wrote:
>> From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kis...@siemens.com>
>>
>> Do not rely on the PSCI CPU-off logic to stop a CPU in case of a fatal
>> hypervisor failure - the CPU could theoretically be woken up again.
>> Rather do a terminal wfi loop inline.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka <jan.kis...@siemens.com>
>> ---
>> hypervisor/arch/arm/control.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/hypervisor/arch/arm/control.c b/hypervisor/arch/arm/control.c
>> index 477f450..2157b0e 100644
>> --- a/hypervisor/arch/arm/control.c
>> +++ b/hypervisor/arch/arm/control.c
>> @@ -382,7 +382,7 @@ void arch_config_commit(struct cell *cell_added_removed)
>>
>> void __attribute__((noreturn)) arch_panic_stop(void)
>> {
>> - psci_cpu_off(this_cpu_data());
>> + asm volatile ("1: wfi; b 1b");
>> __builtin_unreachable();
>> }
>>
>> --
>
> all interrupts are already disabled for all possible callers right?
>
> C
>
Yes, that is true. We enter from Linux with interrupts off and, unless I
missed something, we never enable them in HYP mode.
Jan
--
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RDA ITP SES-DE
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Jailhouse" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to jailhouse-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
