[PATCH 2/2] arm: psci: don't call CPU_OFF blindly

[Stefano Stabellini]

On Fri, 5 Sep 2014, Mark Rutland wrote:
> The generic PSCI operations for arm check the presence of a CPU_OFF ID
> far too late, and in the absence of an ID will panic(), rather than
> producing a warning.
> 
> This patch adds a psci_cpu_disable callback which tests the presence of
> a CPU_OFF id. As this is called earlier than psci_cpu_die, the failure
> can be handled gracefully without brining down the system. Additionally
> a check is added for a UP trusted OS in the presence of PSCI 0.2+. Full
> support will require the use of MIGRATE, but for now rejecting hotplug
> will prevent psci_cpu_die from brining down the system.
> 
> The now redundant check for scpi_ops.cpu_off is removed from
> psci_cpu_die. At the same time, the whitespace is corrected from seven
> spaces to tabs.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland at arm.com>
> Cc: Ashwin Chaugule <ashwin.chaugule at linaro.org>
> Cc: Rob Herring <robh at kernel.org>
> Cc: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini at eu.citrix.com>
> Cc: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell at citrix.com>
> Cc: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall at linaro.org>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon at arm.com>
> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas at arm.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm/kernel/psci_smp.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> Stefano, I've followed your lead with the __ref annotation here, but I couldn't
> figure out why they exist on cpu_die and cpu_kill; it feels rather dodgy. Do
> you know why they were added, or if they are superfluous?

I don't think that __ref is needed.
That particular snipped of code came from Rob Herring, maybe he knows
why it was added in the first place.



> There are some other cleanups that should happen here (static,
> CPU_METHOD_OF_DECLARE), but those will come as a later cleanups series.
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/psci_smp.c b/arch/arm/kernel/psci_smp.c
> index 28a1db4..2b00d3c 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/kernel/psci_smp.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/psci_smp.c
> @@ -56,17 +56,38 @@ static int psci_boot_secondary(unsigned int cpu, struct task_struct *idle)
>  }
>  
>  #ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU
> +int __ref psci_cpu_disable(unsigned int cpu)
> +{
> +	/* Fail early if we don't have CPU_OFF support */
> +	if (!psci_ops.cpu_off)
> +		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * In the presence of a UP trusted OS, it might not be possible to
> +	 * hotplug certain CPUs, and CPU_OFF may return (which would be bad).
> +	 * Supporting a UP trusted OS requires careful use of
> +	 * MIGRATE_INFO_UP_CPU and MIGRATE, so for now fail in the presence of
> +	 * a UP Trusted OS.
> +	 */
> +	if (psci_ops.migrate_info_type &&
> +		psci_ops.migrate_info_type() != PSCI_0_2_TOS_MP) {
> +			pr_warn("Unable to handle UP trusted OS\n");
> +			return -EPERM;
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
>  void __ref psci_cpu_die(unsigned int cpu)
>  {
> -       const struct psci_power_state ps = {
> -               .type = PSCI_POWER_STATE_TYPE_POWER_DOWN,
> -       };
> +	const struct psci_power_state ps = {
> +		.type = PSCI_POWER_STATE_TYPE_POWER_DOWN,
> +	};
>  
> -       if (psci_ops.cpu_off)
> -               psci_ops.cpu_off(ps);
> +	psci_ops.cpu_off(ps);
>  
> -       /* We should never return */
> -       panic("psci: cpu %d failed to shutdown\n", cpu);
> +	/* We should never return */
> +	panic("psci: cpu %d failed to shutdown\n", cpu);
>  }
>  
>  int __ref psci_cpu_kill(unsigned int cpu)
> @@ -109,6 +130,7 @@ bool __init psci_smp_available(void)
>  struct smp_operations __initdata psci_smp_ops = {
>  	.smp_boot_secondary	= psci_boot_secondary,
>  #ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU
> +	.cpu_disable		= psci_cpu_disable,
>  	.cpu_die		= psci_cpu_die,
>  	.cpu_kill		= psci_cpu_kill,
>  #endif
> -- 
> 1.9.1
>