From: Robert Richter <robert.richter@amd.com>
To: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
Cc: "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"ying.huang@intel.com" <ying.huang@intel.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [V3][PATCH 4/6] x86, nmi: add in logic to handle multiple events and unknown NMIs
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 18:18:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110906161842.GI14200@erda.amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1314290748-23569-5-git-send-email-dzickus@redhat.com>
On 25.08.11 12:45:46, Don Zickus wrote:
> Previous patches allow the NMI subsystem to process multipe NMI events
> in one NMI. As previously discussed this can cause issues when an event
> triggered another NMI but is processed in the current NMI. This causes the
> next NMI to go unprocessed and become an 'unknown' NMI.
>
> Having this print 'unknown' NMI to the console would be inaccurate and
> scare users. As a result I have copied the 'skip unknown' NMI logic
> developed by Robert Richter (and simplfied a little because we can
> track _all_ NMIs better instead of just the perf ones) to the main
> NMI handling routine.
>
> It is fairly simple, if when processing an NMI, the nmi_handle routine returns
> more than one event handled, then set a flag for future use. This flag just
> says there might be a possible unknown NMI. If an unknown NMI does come in,
> then it is skipped (swallowed). Otherwise just clear the flag on the next NMI
> if it has events processed.
>
> The algorithm isn't 100% accurate but for most loads we have seen in perf it
> captures a large majority of unknown NMIs. Under high workloads there still
> is the chance that unknown NMIs can trigger because you can time it just right
> such that you are generating NMIs as fast as you can process them and go four
> or five NMIs before seeing the unknown NMI.
>
> Without involving the concept of time when tracking these 'possible' NMIs,
> we may never be 100% reliable. The idea with time being that back-to-back
> NMIs immediately follow each other. Anything more than a micro second or so
> on modern machines between when the first NMI finished to when the second one
> starts, probably indicates a completely new event.
>
> V2:
> - forgot to add the 'read' code for swallow_nmi (went into next patch)
>
> Signed-off-by: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/nmi.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> 1 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/nmi.c b/arch/x86/kernel/nmi.c
> index 45fcd82..435dc71 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/nmi.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/nmi.c
> @@ -270,6 +270,8 @@ 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;
> @@ -281,8 +283,28 @@ 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);
See my comment for patch 3/6.
> return;
> + }
>
> /* Non-CPU-specific NMI: NMI sources can be processed on any CPU */
> raw_spin_lock(&nmi_reason_lock);
> @@ -305,7 +327,10 @@ static notrace __kprobes void default_do_nmi(struct pt_regs *regs)
> }
> raw_spin_unlock(&nmi_reason_lock);
>
> - unknown_nmi_error(reason, regs);
> + if (!__this_cpu_read(swallow_nmi))
> + unknown_nmi_error(reason, regs);
> +
> + __this_cpu_write(swallow_nmi, false);
> }
>
> dotraplinkage notrace __kprobes void
> --
> 1.7.6
>
>
--
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Operating System Research Center
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-09-06 16:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-08-25 16:45 [V3][PATCH 0/6] x86, nmi: new NMI handling routines Don Zickus
2011-08-25 16:45 ` [V3][PATCH 1/6] x86, nmi: split out nmi from traps.c Don Zickus
2011-08-25 16:45 ` [V3][PATCH 2/6] x86, nmi: create new NMI handler routines Don Zickus
2011-08-26 9:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-08-26 14:21 ` Don Zickus
2011-09-06 10:08 ` Robert Richter
2011-09-06 16:53 ` Don Zickus
2011-08-25 16:45 ` [V3][PATCH 3/6] x86, nmi: wire up NMI handlers to new routines Don Zickus
2011-09-06 16:15 ` Robert Richter
2011-09-06 16:52 ` Don Zickus
2011-09-07 9:03 ` Borislav Petkov
2011-09-06 17:20 ` Corey Minyard
2011-09-06 17:49 ` Don Zickus
2011-09-06 17:59 ` Corey Minyard
2011-08-25 16:45 ` [V3][PATCH 4/6] x86, nmi: add in logic to handle multiple events and unknown NMIs Don Zickus
2011-09-06 16:18 ` Robert Richter [this message]
2011-08-25 16:45 ` [V3][PATCH 5/6] x86, nmi: track NMI usage stats Don Zickus
2011-08-25 16:45 ` [V3][PATCH 6/6] x86, nmi: print out NMI stats in /proc/interrupts Don Zickus
2011-09-06 16:39 ` Robert Richter
2011-09-06 17:40 ` Don Zickus
2011-08-26 9:44 ` [V3][PATCH 0/6] x86, nmi: new NMI handling routines Peter Zijlstra
2011-08-26 14:39 ` Don Zickus
2011-08-26 14:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-06 16:43 ` Robert Richter
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=20110906161842.GI14200@erda.amd.com \
--to=robert.richter@amd.com \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=dzickus@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--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