From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@linux.intel.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca>,
Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>
Subject: Re: Perhaps a side effect regarding NMI returns
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 22:28:55 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111129212855.GR24062@one.firstfloor.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1322598920.17003.71.camel@frodo>
> I'm curious to what remote events can be set by an NMI that wont take
> affect in what the NMI interrupted. I would think that NMIs should be
> treated as if they didn't exist, because they should not be calling
> anything that sets NEED_RESCHED or grabbing locks and such.
Hmm, i thought there were cases where we checked if it was in
kernel mode instead of IPIng, and assume the check is done when
returning.
But cannot come up with a concrete example right now. It may have
been wrong. Or I forgot it :)
You're right anything with interrupts should be fine because
it's just blocked.
-Andi
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-11-29 21:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-11-29 4:07 Perhaps a side effect regarding NMI returns Steven Rostedt
2011-11-29 4:53 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-11-29 7:33 ` Paul Turner
2011-11-29 20:09 ` Andi Kleen
2011-11-29 20:12 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-11-29 20:31 ` Andi Kleen
2011-11-29 20:36 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-11-29 20:58 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-11-29 21:05 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-11-29 21:22 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-11-29 22:14 ` Jason Baron
2011-11-29 22:51 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-11-30 11:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-11-29 20:35 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-11-29 20:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-12-07 16:36 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-12-07 16:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-12-07 17:31 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-12-07 17:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-12-07 17:51 ` Andi Kleen
2012-01-08 8:55 ` [tip:perf/core] x86: Do not schedule while still in NMI context tip-bot for Linus Torvalds
2011-11-29 21:28 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
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=20111129212855.GR24062@one.firstfloor.org \
--to=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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