From: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] x86/nmi: enable local irqs in wait_for_nmis()
Date: Wed, 14 May 2014 15:38:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53737FDC.8000806@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <537392700200007800012373@mail.emea.novell.com>
On 14/05/14 14:57, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 14.05.14 at 14:58, <david.vrabel@citrix.com> wrote:
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/nmi.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/nmi.c
>> @@ -111,7 +111,14 @@ int nmi_active;
>>
>> static void __init wait_for_nmis(void *p)
>> {
>> + unsigned long flags;
>> +
>> + local_save_flags(flags);
>> + local_irq_enable();
>> +
>> mdelay((10*1000)/nmi_hz); /* wait 10 ticks */
>> +
>> + local_irq_restore(flags);
>> }
>
> This being the callback for on_selected_cpus(), i.e. called out of
> interrupt context, I don't think it is uniformly safe to enable
> interrupts here. The current behavior anyway is for the function
> to run with interrupts enabled on the boot CPU, and with interrupts
> disabled on the APs. So for this change to make a difference, the
> IRQ would need to be bound to one of the APs, and consequently
> the fix would be to force it onto the BP until boot progressed far
> enough.
The call function IPIs are handled with a direct apic vector so skip the
normal interrupt enabling path for irqs. I can't see anywhere where
irqs are enabled in call_function_interrupt() (x86) and
smp_call_function_interrupt() (common).
David
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-14 14:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-14 12:58 [PATCH 0/4] x86/nmi: improve NMI watchdog test David Vrabel
2014-05-14 12:58 ` [PATCH 1/4] x86/nmi: remove spurious local_irq_enable from check_nmi_watchdog() David Vrabel
2014-05-14 13:25 ` Jan Beulich
2014-05-14 13:31 ` David Vrabel
2014-05-14 13:53 ` Jan Beulich
2014-05-15 11:40 ` Tim Deegan
2014-05-14 12:58 ` [PATCH 2/4] x86/nmi: enable local irqs in wait_for_nmis() David Vrabel
2014-05-14 13:57 ` Jan Beulich
2014-05-14 14:38 ` David Vrabel [this message]
2014-05-14 14:45 ` Jan Beulich
2014-05-15 11:55 ` Tim Deegan
2014-05-14 12:58 ` [PATCH 3/4] x86/nmi: wait for all CPUs in check_nmi_watchdog() David Vrabel
2014-05-14 13:59 ` Jan Beulich
2014-05-14 14:09 ` David Vrabel
2014-05-14 14:33 ` Jan Beulich
2014-05-14 14:09 ` Andrew Cooper
2014-05-15 11:47 ` Tim Deegan
2014-05-14 12:58 ` [PATCH 4/4] x86/nmi: be less verbose when testing the NMI watchdog David Vrabel
2014-05-15 11:48 ` Tim Deegan
2014-05-14 13:03 ` [PATCH 0/4] x86/nmi: improve NMI watchdog test Andrew Cooper
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=53737FDC.8000806@citrix.com \
--to=david.vrabel@citrix.com \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
--cc=keir@xen.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/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.