From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from out01.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.231]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1VBFi1-0006Vn-Cc for kexec@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 19 Aug 2013 03:00:46 +0000 In-Reply-To: <5211831B.6090704@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <5200BFB3.2050202@jp.fujitsu.com> <520A10A3.5080303@hp.com> <520B4A22.2030800@hp.com> <87ob90839p.fsf@xmission.com> <5211831B.6090704@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 From: "Eric W. Biederman" Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2013 19:59:53 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Help Test] kdump, x86, acpi: Reproduce CPU0 SMI corruption issue after unsetting BSP flag List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "kexec" Errors-To: kexec-bounces+dwmw2=twosheds.infradead.org@lists.infradead.org To: HATAYAMA Daisuke Cc: Fenghua Yu , "kexec@lists.infradead.org" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "Mitchell, Lisa (MCLinux in Fort Collins)" , Vivek Goyal , "H. Peter Anvin" , bhelgaas@google.com, Jingbai Ma > >Sorry Eric, I'm not clear to what you mean by ``short one core''... >Which are you suggesting? Disabling BSP if crash happens on AP is >reasonable? >Or restricting cpus to a single one only just as the current kdump >configuration is reasonable? I am suggesting we start every cpu except the BSP from the AP we started on. N-1 cpus seems like a good tradeoff between performance and reliability for those who need it. Eric _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec