Re: [patch 2/2] x86: mce: Implement cmci poll mode for intel machines

[Chen Gong <gong.chen@linux.intel.com>]

于 2012/6/6 18:23, Thomas Gleixner 写道:
> On Wed, 6 Jun 2012, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 6 Jun 2012, Chen Gong wrote:
>>> 于 2012/6/5 21:35, Thomas Gleixner 写道:
>>> I add some print in timer callback, it shows:
>>>
>>> smp_processor_id() = 0, mce_timer_fn data(CPU id) = 10
>>> timer->function = ffffffff8102c200, timer pending = 1, CPU = 0
>>> (add_timer_on, BUG!!!)
>> Sure. That's not a surprise. The timer function for cpu 10 is called
>> on cpu 0. And the timer function does:
>>
>>    struct timer_list *t = &__get_cpu_var(mce_timer);
>>
>> which gets a pointer to the timer of cpu0. And that timer is
>> pending. So yes, it's exploding for a good reason.
>>
>> Though, this does not tell us how the timer of cpu10 gets on cpu0.
>>
>> Did you do any cpu hotplug operations ?
> There's a problem in the hotplug code.
>
>         case CPU_DOWN_PREPARE:
> 	case CPU_DOWN_PREPARE_FROZEN:
>                 del_timer_sync(t);
>                 smp_call_function_single(cpu, mce_disable_cpu, &action, 1);
>                 break;
>
> We delete the timer before we disable mce and cmci. So if the cmci
> interrupt kicks the timer after del_timer_sync() and before
> mce_disable_cpu() is called on the other core, then the timer is still
> enqueued when the cpu goes down. After it's dead the timer is migrated
> and then the above scenario happens.
>
> Can you try the following just for a quick test ?
>
>         case CPU_DOWN_PREPARE:
> 	case CPU_DOWN_PREPARE_FROZEN:
>                 del_timer_sync(t);
>                 smp_call_function_single(cpu, mce_disable_cpu, &action, 1);
> +		del_timer_sync(t);
>                 break;
I think you mean

-               del_timer_sync(t);
                smp_call_function_single(cpu, mce_disable_cpu, &action, 1);
+		del_timer_sync(t);
                break;


I don't execute hotplug and the whole error injection shouldn't trigger
hotplug.
I tried your patch but the test result was as before. But your thought
give me
a new way to find out the reason. I will continue to do more tests on
tomorrow. :-)