From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752565AbaEZNpq (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 May 2014 09:45:46 -0400 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([78.46.96.112]:52213 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752122AbaEZNpo (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 May 2014 09:45:44 -0400 Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 15:45:33 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov To: Tomasz Nowicki Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net, lenb@kernel.org, tony.luck@intel.com, bp@suse.de, m.chehab@samsung.com, linux-edac@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] acpi, apei, ghes: Factor out NMI error notification context. Message-ID: <20140526134533.GH25732@pd.tnic> References: <1397056476-9183-1-git-send-email-tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org> <1397056476-9183-5-git-send-email-tomasz.nowicki@linaro.org> <20140513194125.GD8760@pd.tnic> <537F39D7.6090309@linaro.org> <20140523164824.GG21332@pd.tnic> <538340EE.7070408@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <538340EE.7070408@linaro.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 03:26:06PM +0200, Tomasz Nowicki wrote: > Now I do follow :) Nicely done, I have applied your patch and indeed > there are more arch dependencies for !X86. Not nicely enough, I guess :-) > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/nmi.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/nmi.h > index 86f9301..0f03ab6 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/nmi.h > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/nmi.h > @@ -54,7 +54,18 @@ struct nmiaction { > > int __register_nmi_handler(unsigned int, struct nmiaction *); > > -void unregister_nmi_handler(unsigned int, const char *); > +void unregister_nmi_handler(unsigned int type, const char *name); > + > +static inline int arch_apei_register_nmi(nmi_handler_t fn, > + const char *name) > +{ > + return register_nmi_handler(NMI_LOCAL, fn, 0, name); > +} > + > +static inline void arch_apei_unregister_nmi(const char *name) > +{ > + unregister_nmi_handler(NMI_LOCAL, name); > +} I'm guessing you've added those wrappers so that you don't have to export NMI_LOCAL? > void stop_nmi(void); > void restart_nmi(void); > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c > index 35a44d9..84c79af 100644 > --- a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c > +++ b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c > @@ -47,13 +47,11 @@ > #include > #include > #include > +#include > > #include > #include > #include > -#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_APEI_NMI > -#include > -#endif > > #include "apei-internal.h" > > @@ -718,7 +716,6 @@ static int ghes_notify_sci(struct notifier_block *this, > return ret; > } > > -#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_APEI_NMI > /* > * printk is not safe in NMI context. So in NMI handler, we allocate > * required memory from lock-less memory allocator > @@ -817,7 +814,7 @@ static int ghes_notify_nmi(unsigned int cmd, struct > pt_regs *regs) > { > struct ghes *ghes, *ghes_global = NULL; > int sev, sev_global = -1; > - int ret = NMI_DONE; > + int ret = APEI_NMI_DONE; > > BUG_ON(!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ACPI_APEI_NMI)); > > @@ -832,14 +829,14 @@ static int ghes_notify_nmi(unsigned int cmd, struct > pt_regs *regs) > sev_global = sev; > ghes_global = ghes; > } > - ret = NMI_HANDLED; > + ret = APEI_NMI_HANDLED; > } > > - if (ret == NMI_DONE) > + if (ret == APEI_NMI_DONE) > goto out; > > if (sev_global >= GHES_SEV_PANIC) { > - oops_begin(); > + arch_apei_nmi_oops_begin(); > ghes_print_queued_estatus(); > __ghes_print_estatus(KERN_EMERG, ghes_global->generic, > ghes_global->estatus); > @@ -914,7 +911,7 @@ static int ghes_notify_init_nmi(struct ghes *ghes) > ghes_estatus_pool_expand(len); > mutex_lock(&ghes_list_mutex); > if (list_empty(&ghes_nmi)) > - status = register_nmi_handler(NMI_LOCAL, ghes_notify_nmi, 0, "ghes"); > + status = arch_apei_register_nmi(ghes_notify_nmi, "ghes"); > list_add_rcu(&ghes->list, &ghes_nmi); > mutex_unlock(&ghes_list_mutex); > > @@ -928,7 +925,7 @@ static void ghes_notify_remove_nmi(struct ghes *ghes) > mutex_lock(&ghes_list_mutex); > list_del_rcu(&ghes->list); > if (list_empty(&ghes_nmi)) > - unregister_nmi_handler(NMI_LOCAL, "ghes"); > + arch_apei_unregister_nmi("ghes"); > mutex_unlock(&ghes_list_mutex); > /* > * To synchronize with NMI handler, ghes can only be > @@ -941,17 +938,14 @@ static void ghes_notify_remove_nmi(struct ghes *ghes) > > static void ghes_init_nmi(void) > { > + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ACPI_APEI_NMI)) > + return; > + > init_irq_work(&ghes_proc_irq_work, ghes_proc_in_irq); > ghes_notify_tab[ACPI_HEST_NOTIFY_NMI].init_call = ghes_notify_init_nmi; > ghes_notify_tab[ACPI_HEST_NOTIFY_NMI].remove_call = > ghes_notify_remove_nmi; > } > -#else > -static inline void ghes_init_nmi(void) > -{ > - > -} > -#endif > > static int ghes_notify_init_polled(struct ghes *ghes) > { > diff --git a/include/linux/nmi.h b/include/linux/nmi.h > index 084b4c5..1aa351c 100644 > --- a/include/linux/nmi.h > +++ b/include/linux/nmi.h > @@ -56,4 +56,19 @@ extern int proc_dowatchdog(struct ctl_table *, int , > void __user *, size_t *, loff_t *); > #endif > > +#define APEI_NMI_DONE 0 > +#define APEI_NMI_HANDLED 1 > + > +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_APEI_NMI > +#include > +#define arch_apei_nmi_oops_begin() oops_begin() > +#else > +#define arch_apei_register_nmi(fn, n) ({ \ > + void __attribute__((unused)) *dummy = fn; \ Do we really need this dummy assignment? Wouldn't it be just fine to simply have: #define arch_apei_register_nmi(fn, n) ({ (-ENOSYS); }) Just a nitpick, though; otherwise, this looks nicely abstracted. Thanks! -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine. --