public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Peter Zijlstra" <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
	"Frédéric Weisbecker" <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] x86: only call smp_processor_id in non-preempt cases
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 10:35:46 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101118153546.GA15430@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101118144921.GB28350@elte.hu>

On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 03:49:21PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 09:14:07AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > 
> > > * Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > There are some paths that walk the die_chain with preemption on.
> > > 
> > > What are those codepaths? At minimum it's worth documenting them.
> > 
> > Well the one that caused the bug was do_general_protection which walks the
> > die_chain with DIE_GPF.
> > 
> > I can document them, though it might be time consuming to audit them and hope they 
> > don't change.
> 
> Listing one example is enough.
> 
> > [...]  I guess my bigger question is, is it expected that anyone who calls the 
> > die_chain to have preemption disabled?  If not, then does it matter if we document 
> > it?
> 
> Yes, it might be a bug to call those handlers with preemption on (or even with irqs 
> on). But if the code is fine as-is then documenting a single example would be nice.
> 

Is this better?

Cheers, 
Don

------------------------------------->
From: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 13:34:33 -0400
Subject: [PATCH 1/6] x86: only call smp_processor_id in non-preempt cases

There are some paths that walk the die_chain with preemption on.
Make sure we are in an NMI call before we start doing anything.

This was triggered by do_general_protection calling notify_die with
DIE_GPF.

Reported-by: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
---
 arch/x86/kernel/apic/hw_nmi.c |    3 ++-
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/hw_nmi.c b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/hw_nmi.c
index 5c4f952..ef4755d 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/hw_nmi.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/hw_nmi.c
@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace_handler(struct notifier_block *self,
 {
 	struct die_args *args = __args;
 	struct pt_regs *regs;
-	int cpu = smp_processor_id();
+	int cpu;
 
 	switch (cmd) {
 	case DIE_NMI:
@@ -60,6 +60,7 @@ arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace_handler(struct notifier_block *self,
 	}
 
 	regs = args->regs;
+	cpu = smp_processor_id();
 
 	if (cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, to_cpumask(backtrace_mask))) {
 		static arch_spinlock_t lock = __ARCH_SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED;
-- 
1.7.3.2


  reply	other threads:[~2010-11-18 15:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-11-12 14:50 [PATCH 1/3] x86: only call smp_processor_id in non-preempt cases Don Zickus
2010-11-12 14:50 ` [PATCH 2/3] x86, hw_nmi: Move backtrace_mask declaration under ARCH_HAS_NMI_WATCHDOG Don Zickus
2010-11-12 14:50 ` [PATCH 3/3] x86: Avoid calling arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace() at the same time Don Zickus
2010-11-18 15:57   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-11-19  3:00     ` DDD
2010-11-18  8:14 ` [PATCH 1/3] x86: only call smp_processor_id in non-preempt cases Ingo Molnar
2010-11-18 14:22   ` Don Zickus
2010-11-18 14:49     ` Ingo Molnar
2010-11-18 15:35       ` Don Zickus [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-01-05  3:38 [PATCH 1/3] x86: Only " 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=20101118153546.GA15430@redhat.com \
    --to=dzickus@redhat.com \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    /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