From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S938187AbXGTPqr (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Jul 2007 11:46:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932197AbXGTPqj (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Jul 2007 11:46:39 -0400 Received: from gw.goop.org ([64.81.55.164]:38728 "EHLO mail.goop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932379AbXGTPqi (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Jul 2007 11:46:38 -0400 Message-ID: <46A0D8A1.8030904@goop.org> Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 08:45:37 -0700 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4 (X11/20070615) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andi Kleen CC: compudj@krystal.dyndns.org, patches@x86-64.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] [3/11] x86: Stop MCEs and NMIs during code patching References: <20070720532.949522000@suse.de> <20070720153247.75CAD14E7C@wotan.suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20070720153247.75CAD14E7C@wotan.suse.de> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andi Kleen wrote: > +void stop_nmi(void) > +{ > + ignore_nmis++; > + acpi_nmi_disable(); > +} > + > +void restart_nmi(void) > +{ > + ignore_nmis--; > + acpi_nmi_enable(); > +} > Wouldn't it be better to just assign ignore_nmis rather than inc/dec it (and perhaps BUG on a double stop or restart)? Also, is acpi_nmi_disable/enable's use of on_each_cpu safe with interrupts disabled if we know there's only one CPU alive at this point? J