From: Sebastian Ott <sebott@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: PATCH] s390: fix machine check handling
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2014 16:03:14 +0100 (CET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.11.1411281544190.1648@denkbrett> (raw)
Hi,
would it be possible to have this one for 3.18 (if not, please add
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v3.18)
Regards,
Sebastian
>8-----
>From ca198a6ff5766f19645104b7f8d621774524c4b4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sebastian Ott <sebott@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2014 15:40:57 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] s390: fix machine check handling
Commit eb7e7d76 "s390: Replace __get_cpu_var uses" broke machine check
handling.
We copy machine check information from per-cpu to a stack variable for
local processing. Next we should zap the per-cpu variable, not the
stack variable.
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Ott <sebott@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
---
arch/s390/kernel/nmi.c | 8 ++------
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/nmi.c b/arch/s390/kernel/nmi.c
index dd1c24c..3f51cf4 100644
--- a/arch/s390/kernel/nmi.c
+++ b/arch/s390/kernel/nmi.c
@@ -54,12 +54,8 @@ void s390_handle_mcck(void)
*/
local_irq_save(flags);
local_mcck_disable();
- /*
- * Ummm... Does this make sense at all? Copying the percpu struct
- * and then zapping it one statement later?
- */
- memcpy(&mcck, this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_mcck), sizeof(mcck));
- memset(&mcck, 0, sizeof(struct mcck_struct));
+ mcck = *this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_mcck);
+ memset(this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_mcck), 0, sizeof(mcck));
clear_cpu_flag(CIF_MCCK_PENDING);
local_mcck_enable();
local_irq_restore(flags);
--
1.8.4.2
next reply other threads:[~2014-11-28 15:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-11-28 15:03 Sebastian Ott [this message]
2014-11-28 15:38 ` PATCH] s390: fix machine check handling Christoph Lameter
2014-12-02 17:19 ` [PATCH percpu/for-3.18-fixes] s390: fix machine check regression caused by the conversion from __get_cpu_var() to this_cpu_ptr() Tejun Heo
2014-12-02 17:32 ` Sebastian Ott
2014-12-02 17:44 ` Tejun Heo
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=alpine.LFD.2.11.1411281544190.1648@denkbrett \
--to=sebott@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=tj@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