From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Jue Wang <juew@google.com>, "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"patches@lists.linux.dev" <patches@lists.linux.dev>
Subject: RE: [RFC] x86/mce: Add workaround for SKX/CLX/CPX spurious machine checks
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2022 21:07:05 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <be53997f26704089b941d33d9bf47bc6@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YgGAv/aCVG+RDADI@zn.tnic>
> In that case, you can just as well test the MSR bit directly
> MSR_IA32_MISC_ENABLE_FAST_STRING_BIT. If it set, you clear it, done.
Yes. That would work. It's an extra MSR read instead of a memory read. But this
isn't a performance path.
>> Maybe this would be more human friendly?
>>
>> pr_err("CPU%d: Performance now degraded after applying machine check workaround\n",
>> smp_processor_id());
>
> Well, is there an erratum you can refer to in it instead?
The erratum has made its way through to the public specification update yet :-(
> Explaining the whole deal in a single error message is hard and almost
> certainly insufficient.
Not ideal, but the message is a search tool to get to these e-mail discussions.
> Also, what's the use of that message issuing once on every CPU? Instead
> of being a _once() message?
pr_err_once() would be better.
-Tony
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-07 21:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-07 4:36 [RFC] x86/mce: Add workaround for SKX/CLX/CPX spurious machine checks Jue Wang
2022-02-07 18:23 ` Luck, Tony
2022-02-07 18:52 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-02-07 19:24 ` Luck, Tony
2022-02-07 20:27 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-02-07 21:07 ` Luck, Tony [this message]
2022-02-07 21:20 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-02-07 21:51 ` Luck, Tony
2022-02-08 15:04 ` Jue Wang
2022-02-08 15:09 ` [PATCH] " Jue Wang
2022-02-11 20:08 ` Jue Wang
2022-02-11 20:18 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-02-11 20:23 ` Jue Wang
2022-02-15 18:42 ` Luck, Tony
2022-02-15 22:08 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-02-15 22:22 ` Luck, Tony
2022-02-16 10:28 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-02-16 15:50 ` Jue Wang
2022-02-16 18:02 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-02-16 18:41 ` Luck, Tony
2022-02-16 18:52 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-02-16 18:58 ` Luck, Tony
2022-02-16 18:59 ` Jue Wang
2022-02-16 21:53 ` [PATCH] x86/mce: work around an erratum on fast string copy instructions Jue Wang
2022-02-17 16:30 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-02-17 16:32 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-02-18 1:32 ` [PATCH v2] " Jue Wang
2022-02-18 15:07 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-02-18 16:03 ` Jue Wang
2022-02-18 16:14 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-02-18 16:21 ` Jue Wang
2022-02-18 17:16 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-02-18 17:39 ` Jue Wang
[not found] ` <CAPcxDJ7=hCz6KRih4OBVv-k8WLcBL4n+VSpeP_zky7Uunq89zg@mail.gmail.com>
2022-02-18 22:05 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-02-18 22:38 ` Luck, Tony
2022-02-18 22:58 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-02-18 17:58 ` Luck, Tony
2022-02-19 18:09 ` [tip: ras/core] x86/mce: Work " tip-bot2 for Jue Wang
2022-02-16 5:40 ` [PATCH] x86/mce: Add workaround for SKX/CLX/CPX spurious machine checks Jue Wang
2022-02-16 5:56 ` [PATCH] x86/mce: work around an erratum on fast string copy instructions Jue Wang
2022-02-16 9:04 ` David Laight
2022-02-16 15:33 ` Jue Wang
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=be53997f26704089b941d33d9bf47bc6@intel.com \
--to=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=juew@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=patches@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=x86@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