From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262906AbUGRHeS (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Jul 2004 03:34:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263107AbUGRHeS (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Jul 2004 03:34:18 -0400 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.191]:42983 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262906AbUGRHeR (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Jul 2004 03:34:17 -0400 From: Christian Borntraeger To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] was: [RFC] removal of sync in panic Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2004 09:34:12 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 Cc: Tim Wright , Andrew Morton , lmb@suse.de References: <200407141745.47107.linux-kernel@borntraeger.net> <200407150658.54925.linux-kernel@borntraeger.net> <1090090902.14032.15.camel@kryten.internal.splhi.com> In-Reply-To: <1090090902.14032.15.camel@kryten.internal.splhi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200407180934.12418.linux-kernel@borntraeger.net> X-Provags-ID: kundenserver.de abuse@kundenserver.de auth:5a8b66f42810086ecd21595c2d6103b9 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Tim Wright wrote: > Yes, I've seen this multiple times. > I also agree that it seems a sensible patch. I have one dumb question. > Given that we're panicing and we know things are "bad", is there any > reason not to call smp_send_stop() as early as possible, rather than as > the last thing which we currently do? As you say, the other cpus are > happily continuing, potentially destroying data, and it seems that > stopping this as quickly as possible would be desirable. That suggestion was my number 2 is my first mail :-) On the other hand, if we remove the sync stuff, smp_send_stop is called quite early. Only a printf is called before smp_send_stop().