lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jan]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Question about qspinlock nest
On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 11:02:29AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Well, x86 too has multiple non-maskable vectors, and afaik only the
> actual NMI vector is covered in tricky. But our MCE vector is
> non-maskable too (and I have vague memories of there being more).
>
> Boris, Rostedt, WTH happens if our MCE code goes and hits a #BP ? (not
> unlikely with this proliferation of self-modifying code)
>
> Anyway, the idea is that they can indeed not interrupt themselves, but I
> would not be surprised if the whole MCE thing is riddled with fail (on
> x86).

As we talked on IRC: we'll apply a mixture of "So don't do that
then!" hints i.e., kprobing MCE code etc, and fix the issues like the
schedule_work() invocation.

In general, I'd like to make/keep the #MC handler as simple and
as idiot-proof as possible.

--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.

Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-01-18 11:25    [W:0.055 / U:33.232 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site