From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, kexec-list <kexec@lists.infradead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, kdump: No need to disable ioapic in crash path
Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2012 14:55:14 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m1sjilc4vh.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120208201145.GX5650@redhat.com> (Don Zickus's message of "Wed, 8 Feb 2012 15:11:45 -0500")
Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com> writes:
> On Tue, Feb 07, 2012 at 03:35:59PM -0800, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> writes:
>>
>> > On Tue, Feb 07, 2012 at 04:57:41PM -0500, Don Zickus wrote:
>> >> On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 03:24:46PM -0800, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> >> > > Eric, brought up a point that because the boot code was restructured we may
>> >> > > not need to disable the io apic any more in the crash path. The original
>> >> > > concern that led to the development of disable_IO_APIC, was that the TSC
>> >> > > calibration on boot up relied on the PIT timer for reference. Access
>> >> > > to the PIT required 8259 interrupts to be working. This wouldn't work
>> >> > > if the ioapic needed to be configured. So on panic path, the ioapic was
>> >> > > reconfigured to use virtual wire mode to allow the 8259 to passthrough.
>> >> >
>> >> > A small clarification originally it was the jiffies calibration that
>> >> > would fail if we could cause the PIT to generate interrupts through the
>> >> > 8259. The boot would then hang at calibrating jiffies.
>> >>
>> >> Ok. Thanks!
>> >
>> > So now what has changed? Do we setup LAPIC and IOAPIC early enough to
>> > receive PIT interrupts in regular mode (non-virtual wire mode) or
>> > something else?
>>
>> Yes. Part of the Moorstown work required that this be done because
>> moorsetown did not support legacy mode. Last I looked the code hadn't
>> been generalized beyond Moorsetown but empirically it works now.
>>
>> Don as to what to test the only case I can think of that might be spooky
>> is a screaming interrupt during the handover. You might want to try
>> playing with lkcdtm to try some of the more exotic crash scenarios. But
>> all I expect further testing might reveal are places where we are not
>> as robust in initializing the hardware as we might be. Things that
>> might have been papered over by the ioapic shutdown.
>
> I ran lkdtm by panic'ing in the interrupt handle thus leaving device
> interrupt un-ack'd and the apic might have been un-ack'd too (jprobes
> hooked in at do_IRQ). 3 out 3 times the second kernel came up on my core2
> quad.
That sounds like more than enough basic testing for me. Document your
testing in a patch description and let's get the unnecessary local apic
and ioapic stomping removed from the kexec on panic path.
There were bugs. We deleted the code that had them. The bugs are gone
and there are no new problems goes over very well in my book.
Eric
_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-02-08 22:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-02-02 18:12 [PATCH] x86, kdump: No need to disable ioapic in crash path Don Zickus
2012-02-02 23:24 ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-02-07 21:57 ` Don Zickus
2012-02-07 22:19 ` Vivek Goyal
2012-02-07 23:35 ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-02-08 20:11 ` Don Zickus
2012-02-08 22:55 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2012-02-09 14:48 ` Don Zickus
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2012-02-29 20:08 Don Zickus
2012-03-15 20:26 ` Don Zickus
2012-03-15 21:16 ` Seiji Aguchi
2012-03-15 21:33 ` Don Zickus
2012-03-15 21:37 ` Seiji Aguchi
2012-04-30 20:53 ` Don Zickus
2012-05-02 19:10 ` Seiji Aguchi
2012-05-02 19:39 ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-05-02 19:59 ` Don Zickus
2012-05-02 20:24 ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-03-29 16:02 ` Don Zickus
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=m1sjilc4vh.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=dzickus@redhat.com \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox