From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Zhaolong Zhang <zhangzl2013@126.com>,
"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
"linux-edac@vger.kernel.org" <linux-edac@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] x86/mce: drop cpu_missing since we have more capable mce_missing_cpus
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2021 19:50:57 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <84e2622e4300490587793d2509f7b3ff@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YYrQe7bYe+OBzZ4B@zn.tnic>
>> Just a note that skipping the mce_panic() here isn't going to help
>> much. With some CPUs stuck not responding to #MC the system is going
>> to lock up or crash for other timeouts in the next few seconds.
>
> Yeh, I spent a couple of minutes today staring at this ->tolerant
> thing and wondering why we need it at all. I wouldn't mind ripping it
> altogether unless you're using it for testing or so.
I think it might have been useful before recoverable machine checks. But
now it just seems to cause confusion. I do not ever use it. I would not be
sad to see it go.
-Tony
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-11-09 19:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-11-04 7:44 [PATCH] x86/mce: correct cpu_missing reporting in mce_timed_out Zhaolong Zhang
2021-11-04 9:13 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-11-04 15:47 ` Luck, Tony
2021-11-04 18:02 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-11-05 2:19 ` Zhaolong Zhang
2021-11-08 8:28 ` [PATCH] x86/mce: drop cpu_missing since we have more capable mce_missing_cpus Zhaolong Zhang
2021-11-08 9:31 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-11-08 10:13 ` Zhaolong Zhang
2021-11-08 10:31 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-11-08 12:47 ` Zhaolong Zhang
2021-11-09 8:31 ` Zhaolong Zhang
2021-11-09 8:35 ` [PATCH] x86/mce: Get rid of cpu_missing Zhaolong Zhang
2021-11-09 9:15 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-11-09 14:19 ` Zhaolong Zhang
2021-11-09 9:07 ` [PATCH] x86/mce: drop cpu_missing since we have more capable mce_missing_cpus Borislav Petkov
2021-11-09 16:06 ` Luck, Tony
2021-11-09 19:48 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-11-09 19:50 ` Luck, Tony [this message]
2021-11-09 20:21 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-11-09 20:44 ` Luck, Tony
2021-11-09 21:30 ` Borislav Petkov
2021-12-20 20:43 ` [PATCH] x86/mce: Remove the tolerance level control Borislav Petkov
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=84e2622e4300490587793d2509f7b3ff@intel.com \
--to=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=linux-edac@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=zhangzl2013@126.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