From: Chen Yucong <slaoub@gmail.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: tony.luck@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-edac@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/mce: Distirbute the clear operation of mces_seen to Per-CPU rather than only monarch CPU
Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 09:55:40 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1400464540.9630.31.camel@debian> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140518163508.GA8003@pd.tnic>
On Sun, 2014-05-18 at 18:35 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 11:05:04PM +0800, Chen Yucong wrote:a
> > mces_seen is a Per-CPU variable which should only be accessed by
> > Per-CPU as possible. So the clear operation of mces_seen should also
> > be lcoal to Per-CPU rather than monarch CPU.
>
> No, you need to do the cleaning in mce_reign because the monarch cpu has
> to run last after all other cpus have scanned their mce banks.
>
But all other CPUs also have to wait monarch CPU to exit from mce_end.
What's the difference between monarch CPU and Per-CPU for clearing
mces_seen? In practice, there is no difference between them. If we use
monarch CPU to clear mces_seen, then Per-CPU variable can not play out
its advantage.
> > Meanwhile, there is also a potential risk that mces_seen will not
> > be be cleared if a timeout occors in mce_end for monarch CPU. As a
> > reuslt, the stale value of mces_seen will reappear on the next mce.
>
> If that happens, we have a bigger problem.
Well, in that case, why is there a need for time-out machine in MCE
handler?
Any potential risks --both logical and realistic-- should be avoided as
possible if there are no more questions and performance penalty.
thx!
cyc
>
> Is that a real issue you're trying to address?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-19 1:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-18 15:05 [PATCH] x86/mce: Distirbute the clear operation of mces_seen to Per-CPU rather than only monarch CPU Chen Yucong
2014-05-18 16:35 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-05-19 1:55 ` Chen Yucong [this message]
2014-05-19 7:26 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-05-19 7:54 ` Chen Yucong
2014-05-19 8:18 ` Borislav Petkov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1400464540.9630.31.camel@debian \
--to=slaoub@gmail.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=linux-edac@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.