From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756198Ab0LASxg (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Dec 2010 13:53:36 -0500 Received: from canuck.infradead.org ([134.117.69.58]:40332 "EHLO canuck.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755487Ab0LASxf convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Dec 2010 13:53:35 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/9] x86, NMI: Remove DIE_NMI_IPI and add priorties to handlers From: Peter Zijlstra To: Cyrill Gorcunov Cc: Don Zickus , Ingo Molnar , Robert Richter , ying.huang@intel.com, Andi Kleen , LKML In-Reply-To: <20101201184128.GB6478@lenovo> References: <1291156050-4482-1-git-send-email-dzickus@redhat.com> <1291156050-4482-5-git-send-email-dzickus@redhat.com> <20101201184128.GB6478@lenovo> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2010 19:53:42 +0100 Message-ID: <1291229622.32004.1886.camel@laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.3 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 21:41 +0300, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: > On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 05:27:25PM -0500, Don Zickus wrote: > > When re-ordering how the NMI handles its callbacks, a conversation started > > asking what DIE_NMI_IPI meant. No one could answer it. > > It should have came from commit > > | commit c4b2bffee2a4115fed2825530f2b906ee2f17bd7 > | Author: Andi Kleen > | Date: Fri Jan 23 18:46:40 2004 -0800 > | > | [PATCH] x86-64 merge > | > | Mainly lots of bug fixes and a few minor features. One change is that > | it uses drivers/Kconfig now like i386. This requires a few minor changes in > | outside Kconfig files which I am sending separately. > ... > > Andi do you remember what the initial idea was? Didn't find any user of it > even in this old commit. Just curious. > > > > > Noticing that is was wasteful to call the die_chain a second time with just > > another argument, DIE_NMI_IPI, it was decided to nuke it and add priorities > > to the die_chain handlers to maintain existing behaviour. > > > > This patch replaces DIE_NMI_IPI with the appropriate option, mostly DIE_NMI. > > Then it adds priorities to those handlers, using a globally defined set of > > priorities for NMI. > > > > The thought is eventually we will just switch the nmi handlers from the > > die_chain to something more nmi specific. > > > > Signed-off-by: Don Zickus > > --- > > Don, maybe switching to say new chains like chain_perf and friends would be > more readable/clean? I'm not against this patch by any means, but just a thought ;) Its a single event (NMI) so we only need a single notifier list, the current one seems to be just fine.