public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@openvz.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@intel.com>, Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>,
	Shaun Ruffell <sruffell@digium.com>,
	Maciej Rutecki <maciej.rutecki@gmail.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
	Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>,
	Robert Richter <robert.richter@amd.com>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH -tip] perf, x86: fix unknown NMIs on a Pentium4 box
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 18:48:48 +0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DA70950.3060102@openvz.org> (raw)

From: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
Subject: [PATCH -tip] perf, x86: fix unknown NMIs on a Pentium4 box

When using perf on a Pentium4 box, lots of unknown NMIs would be generated.
This is the result of a P4 quirk that is subtle.  The P4 generates an NMI
when the counter overflow and unlike other arches where the NMI is a one time
event, the P4 continues to assert its NMI until clear by the OS.

As a side effect to this quirk, the NMI on the apic is masked off to prevent
a stream of NMIs until the overflow flag is cleared.  During the perf
re-design, this subtle-ness was overlooked and the apic was unmasked _before_
the overflow flag was cleared.  As a result, this generated an extra NMI on
the P4 mchines.

The fix is trivial, wait until the NMI is properly handled before un-masking
the apic.

Sadly, in the old nmi watchdog there was a note that explained this exact
behaviour.

 Cyrill Gorcunov: Added a comment into code itself. We should consider
if we need to unmask LVTPC if no oveflow happened at all.

 Ingo Molnar: Pointed out that unmasking unconditionally is proven by time
to be correct.

Signed-off-by: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Shaun Ruffell <sruffell@digium.com>
Tested-by: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@openvz.org>
Acked-by: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@openvz.org>
CC: Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@intel.com>
CC: Maciej Rutecki <maciej.rutecki@gmail.com>
CC: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
CC: Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
CC: Robert Richter <robert.richter@amd.com>
---

Ingo, please make sure I've added conform notes about conditional/uconditional
unmasking in changelog. Don, I've added a comment in code just to not forget why
we need it. Thanks.

 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c |    9 ++++++++-
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

Index: linux-2.6.git/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c
=====================================================================
--- linux-2.6.git.orig/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c
+++ linux-2.6.git/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c
@@ -1370,9 +1370,16 @@ perf_event_nmi_handler(struct notifier_b
 		return NOTIFY_DONE;
 	}

-	apic_write(APIC_LVTPC, APIC_DM_NMI);

 	handled = x86_pmu.handle_irq(args->regs);
+
+	/*
+	 * Note the unmasking of LVTPC entry must be
+	 * done *after* counter oveflow flag is cleared
+	 * otherwise it might lead to double NMIs generation.
+	 */
+	apic_write(APIC_LVTPC, APIC_DM_NMI);
+
 	if (!handled)
 		return NOTIFY_DONE;


-- 
    Cyrill

             reply	other threads:[~2011-04-14 14:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-04-14 14:48 Cyrill Gorcunov [this message]
2011-04-14 15:03 ` [PATCH -tip] perf, x86: fix unknown NMIs on a Pentium4 box Ingo Molnar
2011-04-14 15:06   ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2011-04-14 17:43 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-04-14 17:44   ` Ingo Molnar
2011-04-14 17:49     ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2011-04-14 18:12       ` Shaun Ruffell
2011-04-14 18:14         ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2011-04-14 18:19         ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2011-04-14 19:35           ` David Ahern
2011-04-14 17:46   ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2011-04-14 18:32   ` Don Zickus
2011-04-14 18:45     ` Ingo Molnar
2011-04-14 18:46     ` Ingo Molnar
2011-04-14 19:43       ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2011-04-14 19:57         ` Don Zickus
2011-04-14 20:05           ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2011-04-14 20:18             ` Cyrill Gorcunov

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=4DA70950.3060102@openvz.org \
    --to=gorcunov@openvz.org \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=dzickus@redhat.com \
    --cc=eranian@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=maciej.rutecki@gmail.com \
    --cc=ming.m.lin@intel.com \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=robert.richter@amd.com \
    --cc=sruffell@digium.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