lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Dec]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v6 21/24] arm64: Handle serror in NMI context
From
Date
Hi Catalin,

On 04/12/2018 18:09, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 11:57:12AM +0000, Julien Thierry wrote:
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
>> index 5f4d9ac..66344cd 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c
>> @@ -897,13 +897,17 @@ bool arm64_is_fatal_ras_serror(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned int esr)
>>
>> asmlinkage void do_serror(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned int esr)
>> {
>> - nmi_enter();
>> + const bool was_in_nmi = in_nmi();
>> +
>> + if (!was_in_nmi)
>> + nmi_enter();
>>
>> /* non-RAS errors are not containable */
>> if (!arm64_is_ras_serror(esr) || arm64_is_fatal_ras_serror(regs, esr))
>> arm64_serror_panic(regs, esr);
>>
>> - nmi_exit();
>> + if (!was_in_nmi)
>> + nmi_exit();
>> }
>
> Do we actually need nmi_enter/exit in the outer do_serror() function?
> Could we just move it to arm64_serror_panic()?

They might need to be here in the future: if we support kernel-first we would
have extra calls in here that need to be in_nmi(), the same if we call out to
APEI to support APCI's NOTIFY_SEI.


Thanks,

James

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-12-05 14:03    [W:0.091 / U:2.892 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site