public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
	Robert Richter <robert.richter@amd.com>,
	ying.huang@intel.com, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	jason.wessel@windriver.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 4/6] x86, nmi:  add in logic to handle multiple events and unknown NMIs
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 11:25:23 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110822152523.GD2067@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1314022935.24275.35.camel@twins>

On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 04:22:15PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-08-19 at 16:37 -0400, Don Zickus wrote:
> > @@ -260,6 +260,8 @@ unknown_nmi_error(unsigned char reason, struct pt_regs *regs)
> >         pr_emerg("Dazed and confused, but trying to continue\n");
> >  }
> >  
> > +DEFINE_PER_CPU(bool, swallow_nmi);
> > +
> >  static notrace __kprobes void default_do_nmi(struct pt_regs *regs)
> >  {
> >         unsigned char reason = 0;
> > @@ -271,8 +273,28 @@ static notrace __kprobes void default_do_nmi(struct pt_regs *regs)
> >          * NMI can not be detected/processed on other CPUs.
> >          */
> >         handled = nmi_handle(NMI_LOCAL, regs);
> > -       if (handled)
> > +       if (handled) {
> > +               /*
> > +                * When handling multiple NMI events, we are not
> > +                * sure if the second NMI was dropped (because of
> > +                * too many NMIs), piggy-backed on the same NMI
> > +                * (perf) or is queued right behind this NMI.
> > +                * In the last case, we may accidentally get an
> > +                * unknown NMI because the event is already handled.
> > +                * Flag for this condition and swallow it later.
> > +                *
> > +                * FIXME: This detection has holes in it mainly
> > +                * because we can't tell _when_ the next NMI comes
> > +                * in.  A multi-handled NMI event followed by an 
> > +                * unknown NMI a second later, clearly should not
> > +                * be swallowed.
> > +                */
> > +               if (handled > 1)
> > +                       __this_cpu_write(swallow_nmi, true);
> > +               else
> > +                       __this_cpu_write(swallow_nmi, false);
> >                 return;
> > +       }
> >  
> >         /* Non-CPU-specific NMI: NMI sources can be processed on any CPU */
> >         raw_spin_lock(&nmi_reason_lock);
> > @@ -296,6 +318,8 @@ static notrace __kprobes void default_do_nmi(struct pt_regs *regs)
> >         raw_spin_unlock(&nmi_reason_lock);
> >  
> >         unknown_nmi_error(reason, regs);
> > +
> > +       __this_cpu_write(swallow_nmi, false);
> >  } 
> 
> All writes, no reads... the actual dropping of NMIs got lost and now
> lives in patch 5 which purports to be about statistics only.

Oops.  I screwed up when breaking up the changes into multiple patches.
I'll fix that.  Thanks for catching that.

Cheers,
Don


  reply	other threads:[~2011-08-22 15:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-08-19 20:37 [RFC][PATCH 0/6] x86, nmi: new NMI handling routines Don Zickus
2011-08-19 20:37 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/6] x86, nmi: split out nmi from traps.c Don Zickus
2011-08-19 20:37 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/6] x86, nmi: create new NMI handler routines Don Zickus
2011-08-22 14:13   ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-08-22 15:21     ` Don Zickus
2011-08-22 15:26       ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-08-22 15:41         ` Don Zickus
2011-08-22 15:31       ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-08-22 14:16   ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-08-22 15:23     ` Don Zickus
2011-08-23 14:14     ` Don Zickus
2011-08-23 14:17       ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-08-24 17:04   ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-08-24 17:44     ` Don Zickus
2011-08-24 17:51       ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-08-24 18:16         ` Don Zickus
2011-08-24 18:19           ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-08-24 19:16             ` Paul E. McKenney
2011-08-19 20:37 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/6] x86, nmi: wire up NMI handlers to new routines Don Zickus
2011-08-19 20:37 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/6] x86, nmi: add in logic to handle multiple events and unknown NMIs Don Zickus
2011-08-22 14:22   ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-08-22 15:25     ` Don Zickus [this message]
2011-08-19 20:37 ` [RFC][PATCH 5/6] x86, nmi: track NMI usage stats Don Zickus
2011-08-19 20:37 ` [RFC][PATCH 6/6] x86, nmi: print out NMI stats in /proc/interrupts Don Zickus
2011-08-22 14:27   ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-08-22 15:28     ` 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=20110822152523.GD2067@redhat.com \
    --to=dzickus@redhat.com \
    --cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
    --cc=jason.wessel@windriver.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=robert.richter@amd.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=ying.huang@intel.com \
    /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