From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
Cc: Chen Yucong <slaoub@gmail.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-edac@vger.kernel.org" <linux-edac@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/mce: Clear a useless global variable in mce.c
Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 20:15:24 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140519181524.GC6311@pd.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F3280E51C@ORSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com>
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 05:59:23PM +0000, Luck, Tony wrote:
> - atomic_inc(&mce_entry);
> -
>
> I have used this in the past (in conjunction with an external debugger) to
> diagnose problems (not all cpus showing up in the machine check handler).
>
> But I suppose these can also be diagnosed from the "Timeout synchronizing ..."
> message from mce_timed_out() [though with a bit less precision ... we know
> that some cpus didn't show up, but we don't have a count of how many did,
> or how many are missing.
>
> If we print the value of "mce_callin" somewhere in mce_timed_out() ...
> then I think we'd have equivalent functionality (in fact better - because
> we don't need the external debugger to peek at mce_entry).
Right, I was thinking about it and this is something maybe you guys
should decide: do we want to panic by default in mce_timed_out if some
cores didn't show up?
I'm looking at this snippet:
/* CHECKME: Make panic default for 1 too? */
if (mca_cfg.tolerant < 1)
mce_panic("Timeout synchronizing machine check over CPUs",
NULL, NULL);
and since we have .tolerant=1 by default...
I mean, does the machine even recover after some of the cores have gone
into the weeds in #MC? Provided, of course, we don't have a no-way-out
MCE and we can resume execution.
Or is the box so hammered that there's no turning back?
Concerning mce_entry, I don't care all that much - if it is really
useful, you might slap a comment saying so and keep it, for all I care.
Thanks.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-19 18:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-17 12:05 [PATCH] x86/mce: Clear a useless global variable in mce.c Chen Yucong
2014-05-19 17:59 ` Luck, Tony
2014-05-19 18:15 ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2014-05-19 22:06 ` Luck, Tony
2014-05-20 10:02 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-05-20 17:46 ` Tony Luck
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2014-05-17 8:45 Chen Yucong
2014-05-17 9:58 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-05-19 0:08 ` Chen Yucong
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=20140519181524.GC6311@pd.tnic \
--to=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=linux-edac@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=slaoub@gmail.com \
--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.