From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751976AbaKKQbG (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Nov 2014 11:31:06 -0500 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([78.46.96.112]:48627 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751887AbaKKQbE (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Nov 2014 11:31:04 -0500 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 17:30:59 +0100 From: Borislav Petkov To: Andy Lutomirski Cc: Chen Gong , X86 ML , Peter Zijlstra , Oleg Nesterov , Tony Luck , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] x86/mce: Simplify flow when handling recoverable memory errors Message-ID: <20141111163059.GH31490@pd.tnic> References: <1407998986-1834-1-git-send-email-gong.chen@linux.intel.com> <1407998986-1834-5-git-send-email-gong.chen@linux.intel.com> <20141111114248.GD31490@pd.tnic> <20141111161309.GG31490@pd.tnic> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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 Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 08:22:45AM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > I think it's okay-ish, but only if it's necessary, and I still don't > see why it's necessary. > > Can't you just remove TIF_MCE_NOTIFY entirely and just do all the > mce_notify_process work directly in do_machine_check? IOW, why do you > need to store any state per-task when it's already on the stack > anyway. I wish but memory_failure() can't run in #MC context as it noodles quite a lot and grabs all kinds of locks and does a bunch of other atomit-context-unsafe things. And it needs to run *before* the process is killed as it looks at its pages. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine. --