xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexey G <x1917x@gmail.com>
To: Igor Druzhinin <igor.druzhinin@citrix.com>
Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
	jbeulich@suse.com, xen-devel@lists.xen.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/nmi: lower initial watchdog frequency to avoid boot hangs
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2018 04:17:50 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180207041750.00000668@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <af6cf4c2-401f-4265-a8a6-1ebe28d45a19@citrix.com>

On Tue, 6 Feb 2018 17:21:19 +0000
Igor Druzhinin <igor.druzhinin@citrix.com> wrote:
>On 06/02/18 17:08, Alexey G wrote:
>> The major concern here is the possiblity of SMI being triggered _not_
>> by some specific I/O port access. Primarily, if it actually was a
>> periodic SMI.
>> 
>> If the actual SMI source is not related to some place in the NMI
>> handler code but was eg. due to some SMI timer, lowering NMI watchdog
>> frequency might not fix the issue completely, but lower its
>> reproducibility (perhaps to some very rare occurrences). So it's
>> better be sure what was the real source of SMI.
>>   
>
>This *is* related to this instruction - it was confirmed empirically.
>Removing this instruction stops SMIs from occurring and effectively
>removes the issue leaving the frequency unchanged.

Hmm, it would be interesting to know for what evil purpose does it need
to trap I/O port 61h.
BTW, on which motherboard model the issue was reproduced?

>> 2. According to the code, it looks like NMI status reading happens
>> while NMIs are still blocked -- this means that SMI handler must
>> exec IRET by itself to reset NMI blocking state -- again, this is
>> possible (eg. in unreal->protmode switching code), but not likely.
>>   
>
>According to SDM one NMI might be pending while taken in SMI mode (see
>ch. 34.8). This is actually even true if NMI comes while servicing
>another NMI. So when we return to the NMI handler from SMI and finish
>it properly the next one appears immediately.

If the SMI handler doesn't mess up with NMI blocking state, it
means that SMI handler processes every reading of port 61h longer than a
watchdog NMI period duration... which is quite long. Motherboard vendor
did something very wrong with I/O trap handling in the SMI handler code
if it takes so much.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

  reply	other threads:[~2018-02-06 18:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-02-05 21:18 [PATCH] x86/nmi: lower initial watchdog frequency to avoid boot hangs Igor Druzhinin
2018-02-06  3:10 ` Alexey G
2018-02-06 14:21   ` Andrew Cooper
2018-02-06 17:08     ` Alexey G
2018-02-06 17:21       ` Igor Druzhinin
2018-02-06 18:17         ` Alexey G [this message]
2018-02-06 19:50           ` Igor Druzhinin
2018-02-07  6:35             ` Alexey G
2018-02-06 14:10 ` Andrew Cooper
2018-02-06 16:07 ` Jan Beulich
2018-02-06 16:14   ` Igor Druzhinin
2018-02-06 16:23     ` Jan Beulich
2018-02-06 16:27       ` Igor Druzhinin
2018-02-06 16:29       ` Igor Druzhinin
2018-02-06 21:51       ` Igor Druzhinin
2018-02-07  9:13         ` Jan Beulich
2018-02-07 13:01           ` Igor Druzhinin
2018-02-07 13:08             ` Jan Beulich
2018-02-07 13:24               ` Andrew Cooper
2018-02-07 15:06                 ` Jan Beulich
2018-02-07 17:08                   ` Andrew Cooper
2018-02-08  9:12                     ` Jan Beulich
2018-02-08 12:18                       ` Andrew Cooper
2018-02-13  9:03                         ` Jan Beulich
2018-02-07 13:54               ` Igor Druzhinin
2018-02-08  6:37             ` Alexey G
2018-02-08 10:47               ` Igor Druzhinin
2018-02-08 12:32                 ` Alexey G
2018-02-08 12:40                   ` Andrew Cooper
2018-02-08 14:37                     ` Alexey G
2018-02-08 15:00                       ` Andrew Cooper
2018-02-08 15:28                         ` Alexey G

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=20180207041750.00000668@gmail.com \
    --to=x1917x@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
    --cc=igor.druzhinin@citrix.com \
    --cc=jbeulich@suse.com \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).