From: Keith Owens <kaos@ocs.com.au>
To: "Fernando Luis Vázquez Cao" <fernando@oss.ntt.co.jp>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
akpm@osdl.org, James.Bottomley@steeleye.com,
fastboot@lists.osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
ak@suse.de
Subject: Re: [Fastboot] [PATCH 1/3] stack overflow safe kdump (2.6.18-rc1-i386) - safe_smp_processor_id
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 14:55:32 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9807.1152593732@kao2.melbourne.sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 11 Jul 2006 13:21:01 +0900." <1152591661.2414.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Fernando Luis =?ISO-8859-1?Q?V=E1zquez?= Cao (on Tue, 11 Jul 2006 13:21:01 +0900) wrote:
>That is a good idea, but I have on concern. In mach-default by default
>we use __send_IPI_shortcut (no_broadcast==0) instead of send_IPI_mask.
>Is it always safe to ignore the no_broadcast setting? In other words,
>can __send_IPI_shortcut be replaced by send_IPI_mask safely?
It is always safe to use send_IPI_mask. It is not used by default
because of concerns that send_IPI_mask may be slower than using a
broadcast, although I do not know if anybody has measurements to back
up that concern. OTOH I can guarantee that sending NMI as a broadcast
has problems, it breaks some Dell Xeon servers[1]. My fix was to never
broadcast NMI, from 2.6.18-rc1 NMI_VECTOR always uses a mask[2] and
crash was changed accordingly[3].
[1] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=114828920800003&r=1&w=2
[2] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=115103727400006&r=1&w=2
[3] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=115096703800003&r=1&w=2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-07-11 4:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-07-10 7:50 [PATCH 1/3] stack overflow safe kdump (2.6.18-rc1-i386) - safe_smp_processor_id Fernando Luis Vázquez Cao
2006-07-10 8:27 ` [Fastboot] " Keith Owens
2006-07-10 10:15 ` Fernando Luis Vázquez Cao
2006-07-10 11:37 ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-07-11 4:21 ` Fernando Luis Vázquez Cao
2006-07-11 4:44 ` Fernando Luis Vázquez Cao
2006-07-11 4:55 ` Keith Owens [this message]
2006-07-11 6:15 ` Fernando Luis Vázquez Cao
2006-07-11 6:25 ` Keith Owens
2006-07-10 12:04 ` Keith Owens
2006-07-11 6:40 ` Fernando Luis Vázquez Cao
2006-07-10 14:16 ` James Bottomley
2006-07-10 18:20 ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-07-10 20:58 ` James Bottomley
2006-07-11 3:42 ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-07-11 12:36 ` James Bottomley
2006-07-11 19:41 ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-07-11 6:21 ` [Fastboot] " Fernando Luis Vázquez Cao
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=9807.1152593732@kao2.melbourne.sgi.com \
--to=kaos@ocs.com.au \
--cc=James.Bottomley@steeleye.com \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=fastboot@lists.osdl.org \
--cc=fernando@oss.ntt.co.jp \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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