On 2021/9/26 10:51, Xiaoming Ni wrote:
When CONFIG_SMP=y, timebase synchronization is required when the second
  kernel is started.
        arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c:
        int __cpu_up(unsigned int cpu, struct task_struct *tidle)
        {
                ...
                if (smp_ops->give_timebase)
                        smp_ops->give_timebase();
                ...
        }

        void start_secondary(void *unused)
        {
                ...
                if (smp_ops->take_timebase)
                        smp_ops->take_timebase();
                ...
        }

When CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU=n and CONFIG_KEXEC_CORE=n,
  smp_85xx_ops.give_timebase is NULL,
  smp_85xx_ops.take_timebase is NULL,
As a result, the timebase is not synchronized.

Timebase  synchronization does not depend on CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU.

Fixes: 56f1ba280719 ("powerpc/mpc85xx: refactor the PM operations")
Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org #v4.6
Signed-off-by: Xiaoming Ni <nixiaom...@huawei.com>
---
  arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/Makefile         | 2 +-
  arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/mpc85xx_pm_ops.c | 4 ++++
  arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/smp.c            | 9 ++++-----
  3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/Makefile 
b/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/Makefile
index 60e4e97a929d..71ce1f6b6966 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/Makefile
+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/Makefile
@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
  # Makefile for the PowerPC 85xx linux kernel.
  #
  obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += smp.o
-obj-$(CONFIG_FSL_PMC)            += mpc85xx_pm_ops.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += mpc85xx_pm_ops.o
obj-y += common.o diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/mpc85xx_pm_ops.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/mpc85xx_pm_ops.c
index 7c0133f558d0..a5656b3e9701 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/mpc85xx_pm_ops.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/mpc85xx_pm_ops.c
@@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
static struct ccsr_guts __iomem *guts; +#ifdef CONFIG_FSL_PMC
  static void mpc85xx_irq_mask(int cpu)
  {
@@ -49,6 +50,7 @@ static void mpc85xx_cpu_up_prepare(int cpu)
  {
}
+#endif
static void mpc85xx_freeze_time_base(bool freeze)
  {
@@ -76,10 +78,12 @@ static const struct of_device_id mpc85xx_smp_guts_ids[] = {
static const struct fsl_pm_ops mpc85xx_pm_ops = {
        .freeze_time_base = mpc85xx_freeze_time_base,
+#ifdef CONFIG_FSL_PMC
        .irq_mask = mpc85xx_irq_mask,
        .irq_unmask = mpc85xx_irq_unmask,
        .cpu_die = mpc85xx_cpu_die,
        .cpu_up_prepare = mpc85xx_cpu_up_prepare,
+#endif
  };
int __init mpc85xx_setup_pmc(void)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/smp.c 
b/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/smp.c
index c6df294054fe..349298cd9671 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/smp.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/smp.c
@@ -40,7 +40,6 @@ struct epapr_spin_table {
        u32     pir;
  };
-#ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU
  static u64 timebase;
  static int tb_req;
  static int tb_valid;
@@ -112,6 +111,7 @@ static void mpc85xx_take_timebase(void)
        local_irq_restore(flags);
  }
+#ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU
  static void smp_85xx_cpu_offline_self(void)
  {
        unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id();
@@ -499,17 +499,16 @@ void __init mpc85xx_smp_init(void)
  #ifdef CONFIG_FSL_CORENET_RCPM
        fsl_rcpm_init();
  #endif
-
-#ifdef CONFIG_FSL_PMC
-       mpc85xx_setup_pmc();
  #endif
+       mpc85xx_setup_pmc();
        if (qoriq_pm_ops) {
                smp_85xx_ops.give_timebase = mpc85xx_give_timebase;
                smp_85xx_ops.take_timebase = mpc85xx_take_timebase;
+#ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU
                smp_85xx_ops.cpu_offline_self = smp_85xx_cpu_offline_self;
                smp_85xx_ops.cpu_die = qoriq_cpu_kill;
-       }
  #endif
+       }
        smp_ops = &smp_85xx_ops;
#ifdef CONFIG_KEXEC_CORE



I found inconsistent time values on different CPUs on my mpc8572 and used this patch to fix it. But today I found out in ppc64 testing that this patch causes the system to trigger oops in the function mpc85xx_freeze_time_base(): the variable "guts" is a null pointer.

I'm sorry to bother you.
I'll fix it and resend v2 later,

Thanks
Xiaoming Ni

Reply via email to