All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Xunlei Pang <xpang@redhat.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Xunlei Pang <xlpang@redhat.com>
Cc: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>,
	Kiyoshi Ueda <k-ueda@ct.jp.nec.com>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	x86@kernel.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Junichi Nomura <j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com>,
	Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com>,
	Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/mce: Don't participate in rendezvous process once nmi_shootdown_cpus() was made
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2017 21:29:24 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <58AAEF34.9000303@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170220110941.vwcm3je3e4kkei6o@pd.tnic>

On 02/20/2017 at 07:09 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 02:10:37PM +0800, Xunlei Pang wrote:
>> @@ -1128,8 +1129,9 @@ void do_machine_check(struct pt_regs *regs, long error_code)
>>  	 */
>>  	int lmce = 1;
>>  
>> -	/* If this CPU is offline, just bail out. */
>> -	if (cpu_is_offline(smp_processor_id())) {
>> +	/* If nmi shootdown happened or this CPU is offline, just bail out. */
>> +	if (cpus_shotdown() ||
> I don't like "cpus_shotdown" - it doesn't hint at all that this is
> special-handling crash/kdump.
>
> And more importantly, I want it to be obvious that we do let the
> crashing CPU into the MCE handler.

Ok, I will export crashing_cpu and use it directly in mce handler.

>
> Why?
>
> If we didn't, you will not handle *any* MCE, even a fatal one, during
> dumping memory so if that dump is corrupted from the MCE, you won't
> know. And I don't want to be the one staring at the corrupted dump and
> wondering why I'm seeing what I'm seeing.
>
> IOW, if we get a fatal MCE during dumping then we should go and die.
> This is much better than silently corrupting the dump and not even
> saying anything about it.
>

My thought is that it doesn't matter after kdump boots as new mce handler
will be installed. If we get a fatal MCE during kdumping, the new handler will
handle the cpus running kdump kernel correctly.

There is a small window between crash and kdump kernel boot, so if a SRAO comes
within this window it will also cause the mce synchronization problem on the crashing
cpu if we don't bail out the crashing cpu.

Regards,
Xunlei

_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Xunlei Pang <xpang@redhat.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Xunlei Pang <xlpang@redhat.com>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kexec@lists.infradead.org, Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>,
	Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>,
	Junichi Nomura <j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com>,
	Kiyoshi Ueda <k-ueda@ct.jp.nec.com>,
	Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/mce: Don't participate in rendezvous process once nmi_shootdown_cpus() was made
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2017 21:29:24 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <58AAEF34.9000303@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170220110941.vwcm3je3e4kkei6o@pd.tnic>

On 02/20/2017 at 07:09 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 02:10:37PM +0800, Xunlei Pang wrote:
>> @@ -1128,8 +1129,9 @@ void do_machine_check(struct pt_regs *regs, long error_code)
>>  	 */
>>  	int lmce = 1;
>>  
>> -	/* If this CPU is offline, just bail out. */
>> -	if (cpu_is_offline(smp_processor_id())) {
>> +	/* If nmi shootdown happened or this CPU is offline, just bail out. */
>> +	if (cpus_shotdown() ||
> I don't like "cpus_shotdown" - it doesn't hint at all that this is
> special-handling crash/kdump.
>
> And more importantly, I want it to be obvious that we do let the
> crashing CPU into the MCE handler.

Ok, I will export crashing_cpu and use it directly in mce handler.

>
> Why?
>
> If we didn't, you will not handle *any* MCE, even a fatal one, during
> dumping memory so if that dump is corrupted from the MCE, you won't
> know. And I don't want to be the one staring at the corrupted dump and
> wondering why I'm seeing what I'm seeing.
>
> IOW, if we get a fatal MCE during dumping then we should go and die.
> This is much better than silently corrupting the dump and not even
> saying anything about it.
>

My thought is that it doesn't matter after kdump boots as new mce handler
will be installed. If we get a fatal MCE during kdumping, the new handler will
handle the cpus running kdump kernel correctly.

There is a small window between crash and kdump kernel boot, so if a SRAO comes
within this window it will also cause the mce synchronization problem on the crashing
cpu if we don't bail out the crashing cpu.

Regards,
Xunlei

  reply	other threads:[~2017-02-20 13:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-02-20  6:10 [PATCH v2] x86/mce: Don't participate in rendezvous process once nmi_shootdown_cpus() was made Xunlei Pang
2017-02-20  6:10 ` Xunlei Pang
2017-02-20 11:09 ` Borislav Petkov
2017-02-20 11:09   ` Borislav Petkov
2017-02-20 13:29   ` Xunlei Pang [this message]
2017-02-20 13:29     ` Xunlei Pang
2017-02-20 20:26     ` Borislav Petkov
2017-02-20 20:26       ` Borislav Petkov
2017-02-21  1:28       ` Xunlei Pang
2017-02-21  1:28         ` Xunlei Pang
2017-02-21  8:41         ` Borislav Petkov
2017-02-21  8:41           ` Borislav Petkov
2017-02-21  1:26     ` Xunlei Pang
2017-02-21  1:26       ` Xunlei Pang
2017-02-21 12:37   ` Xunlei Pang
2017-02-21 12:37     ` Xunlei Pang
2017-02-21 17:27     ` Borislav Petkov
2017-02-21 17:27       ` 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=58AAEF34.9000303@redhat.com \
    --to=xpang@redhat.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=dyoung@redhat.com \
    --cc=j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com \
    --cc=k-ueda@ct.jp.nec.com \
    --cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com \
    --cc=prarit@redhat.com \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=xlpang@redhat.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.