[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH v1 3/4] arm/sysctl: Implement cpu hotplug ops
On 18.09.25 16:35, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi Mykyta, > > On 18/09/2025 13:16, Mykyta Poturai wrote: >> Implement XEN_SYSCTL_CPU_HOTPLUG_* calls to allow for enabling/disabling >> CPU cores in runtime. >> >> Signed-off-by: Mykyta Poturai <mykyta_poturai@xxxxxxxx> >> --- >> xen/arch/arm/sysctl.c | 67 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 67 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/sysctl.c b/xen/arch/arm/sysctl.c >> index 32cab4feff..ca8fb550fd 100644 >> --- a/xen/arch/arm/sysctl.c >> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/sysctl.c >> @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ >> #include <xen/dt-overlay.h> >> #include <xen/errno.h> >> #include <xen/hypercall.h> >> +#include <xen/cpu.h> >> #include <asm/arm64/sve.h> >> #include <public/sysctl.h> >> @@ -23,6 +24,68 @@ void arch_do_physinfo(struct xen_sysctl_physinfo *pi) >> >> XEN_SYSCTL_PHYSCAP_ARM_SVE_MASK); >> } >> +static long cpu_up_helper(void *data) >> +{ >> + unsigned long cpu = (unsigned long) data; >> + return cpu_up(cpu); >> +} >> + >> +static long cpu_down_helper(void *data) >> +{ >> + unsigned long cpu = (unsigned long) data; >> + return cpu_down(cpu); >> +} >> + >> +static long smt_up_down_helper(void *data) > > Looking at the code, you will effectively disable all the CPUs but CPU0. > But I don't understand why. From the name is goal seems to be disable > SMT threading. > Sorry I have slightly misunderstood the x86 implementation/reasoning of this ops. I will drop them in V2. >> +{ >> + bool up = (bool) data; >> + unsigned int cpu; >> + int ret; >> + >> + for_each_present_cpu ( cpu ) >> + { >> + if ( cpu == 0 ) >> + continue; >> + >> + if ( up ) >> + ret = cpu_up(cpu); >> + else >> + ret = cpu_down(cpu); >> + > > Regardless what I wrote above, you likely want to handle preemption. > >> + if ( ret ) >> + return ret; > > + } >> + >> + return 0; >> +} >> + >> +static long cpu_hotplug_sysctl(struct xen_sysctl_cpu_hotplug *hotplug) >> +{ >> + bool up; >> + >> + switch (hotplug->op) { >> + case XEN_SYSCTL_CPU_HOTPLUG_ONLINE: >> + if ( hotplug->cpu == 0 ) > > I can't find a similar check on x86. Do you have any pointer? Jan correctly mentioned that CPU0 can't be disabled so this is a short circuit for clarity. > >> + return -EINVAL; > > On x86, they seem to check for XSM permission before continuing. Can you > explain why this is not necessary? Same questions applies below. I will add XSM checks thanks for pointing this out. > >> + return continue_hypercall_on_cpu(0, cpu_up_helper, >> _p(hotplug->cpu)); >> + >> + case XEN_SYSCTL_CPU_HOTPLUG_OFFLINE: >> + if ( hotplug->cpu == 0 ) >> + return -EINVAL; >> + return continue_hypercall_on_cpu(0, cpu_down_helper, >> _p(hotplug->cpu)); >> + >> + case XEN_SYSCTL_CPU_HOTPLUG_SMT_ENABLE: >> + case XEN_SYSCTL_CPU_HOTPLUG_SMT_DISABLE: > > Why are we implementing those helpers on Arm? > >> + if ( CONFIG_NR_CPUS <= 1 ) >> + return 0; >> + up = hotplug->op == XEN_SYSCTL_CPU_HOTPLUG_SMT_ENABLE; >> + return continue_hypercall_on_cpu(0, smt_up_down_helper, >> _p(up)); >> + >> + default: >> + return -EINVAL; >> + } >> +} >> + >> long arch_do_sysctl(struct xen_sysctl *sysctl, >> XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(xen_sysctl_t) u_sysctl) >> { >> @@ -34,6 +97,10 @@ long arch_do_sysctl(struct xen_sysctl *sysctl, >> ret = dt_overlay_sysctl(&sysctl->u.dt_overlay); >> break; >> + case XEN_SYSCTL_cpu_hotplug: > > This will also enable CPU hotplug on 32-bit Arm. Is this what you > intended? (I see patch #4 only mention 64-bit Arm). It wasn't intended. I will additionally check if it works on arm32 end explicitly specify it. > >> + ret = cpu_hotplug_sysctl(&sysctl->u.cpu_hotplug); >> + break; >> + >> default: >> ret = -ENOSYS; >> break; > > Cheers, > -- Mykyta
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |