From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
Cc: Chen Yucong <slaoub@gmail.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-edac@vger.kernel.org" <linux-edac@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/mce: Clear a useless global variable in mce.c
Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 20:15:24 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140519181524.GC6311@pd.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F3280E51C@ORSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com>
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 05:59:23PM +0000, Luck, Tony wrote:
> - atomic_inc(&mce_entry);
> -
>
> I have used this in the past (in conjunction with an external debugger) to
> diagnose problems (not all cpus showing up in the machine check handler).
>
> But I suppose these can also be diagnosed from the "Timeout synchronizing ..."
> message from mce_timed_out() [though with a bit less precision ... we know
> that some cpus didn't show up, but we don't have a count of how many did,
> or how many are missing.
>
> If we print the value of "mce_callin" somewhere in mce_timed_out() ...
> then I think we'd have equivalent functionality (in fact better - because
> we don't need the external debugger to peek at mce_entry).
Right, I was thinking about it and this is something maybe you guys
should decide: do we want to panic by default in mce_timed_out if some
cores didn't show up?
I'm looking at this snippet:
/* CHECKME: Make panic default for 1 too? */
if (mca_cfg.tolerant < 1)
mce_panic("Timeout synchronizing machine check over CPUs",
NULL, NULL);
and since we have .tolerant=1 by default...
I mean, does the machine even recover after some of the cores have gone
into the weeds in #MC? Provided, of course, we don't have a no-way-out
MCE and we can resume execution.
Or is the box so hammered that there's no turning back?
Concerning mce_entry, I don't care all that much - if it is really
useful, you might slap a comment saying so and keep it, for all I care.
Thanks.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-19 18:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-17 12:05 [PATCH] x86/mce: Clear a useless global variable in mce.c Chen Yucong
2014-05-19 17:59 ` Luck, Tony
2014-05-19 18:15 ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2014-05-19 22:06 ` Luck, Tony
2014-05-20 10:02 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-05-20 17:46 ` Tony Luck
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2014-05-17 8:45 Chen Yucong
2014-05-17 9:58 ` Borislav Petkov
2014-05-19 0:08 ` Chen Yucong
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=20140519181524.GC6311@pd.tnic \
--to=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=linux-edac@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=slaoub@gmail.com \
--cc=tony.luck@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