From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com>
To: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] x86/nmi: enable local irqs in wait_for_nmis()
Date: Wed, 14 May 2014 14:57:36 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <537392700200007800012373@mail.emea.novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1400072299-2285-3-git-send-email-david.vrabel@citrix.com>
>>> On 14.05.14 at 14:58, <david.vrabel@citrix.com> wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/nmi.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/nmi.c
> @@ -111,7 +111,14 @@ int nmi_active;
>
> static void __init wait_for_nmis(void *p)
> {
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + local_save_flags(flags);
> + local_irq_enable();
> +
> mdelay((10*1000)/nmi_hz); /* wait 10 ticks */
> +
> + local_irq_restore(flags);
> }
This being the callback for on_selected_cpus(), i.e. called out of
interrupt context, I don't think it is uniformly safe to enable
interrupts here. The current behavior anyway is for the function
to run with interrupts enabled on the boot CPU, and with interrupts
disabled on the APs. So for this change to make a difference, the
IRQ would need to be bound to one of the APs, and consequently
the fix would be to force it onto the BP until boot progressed far
enough.
Jan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-14 13:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-14 12:58 [PATCH 0/4] x86/nmi: improve NMI watchdog test David Vrabel
2014-05-14 12:58 ` [PATCH 1/4] x86/nmi: remove spurious local_irq_enable from check_nmi_watchdog() David Vrabel
2014-05-14 13:25 ` Jan Beulich
2014-05-14 13:31 ` David Vrabel
2014-05-14 13:53 ` Jan Beulich
2014-05-15 11:40 ` Tim Deegan
2014-05-14 12:58 ` [PATCH 2/4] x86/nmi: enable local irqs in wait_for_nmis() David Vrabel
2014-05-14 13:57 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2014-05-14 14:38 ` David Vrabel
2014-05-14 14:45 ` Jan Beulich
2014-05-15 11:55 ` Tim Deegan
2014-05-14 12:58 ` [PATCH 3/4] x86/nmi: wait for all CPUs in check_nmi_watchdog() David Vrabel
2014-05-14 13:59 ` Jan Beulich
2014-05-14 14:09 ` David Vrabel
2014-05-14 14:33 ` Jan Beulich
2014-05-14 14:09 ` Andrew Cooper
2014-05-15 11:47 ` Tim Deegan
2014-05-14 12:58 ` [PATCH 4/4] x86/nmi: be less verbose when testing the NMI watchdog David Vrabel
2014-05-15 11:48 ` Tim Deegan
2014-05-14 13:03 ` [PATCH 0/4] x86/nmi: improve NMI watchdog test Andrew Cooper
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=537392700200007800012373@mail.emea.novell.com \
--to=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=david.vrabel@citrix.com \
--cc=keir@xen.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.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).