| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2008 16:04:07 -0500 From: Neil Horman <nhorman@...hat.com> To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> Cc: Neil Horman <nhorman@...hat.com>, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>, Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, kexec@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH], issue EOI to APIC prior to calling crash_kexec in die_nmi path On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 12:21:30PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Neil Horman wrote: > >Can an APIC accept an NMI while already handling an NMI? I didn't think > >they > >would interrupt one another, but rather, pend until such time as the > >previous > >NMI was cleared > > The CPU certainly won't (there is a hidden flag that's cleared on IRET > which disables NMI; it's possible to re-enable NMI by executing a dummy > IRET inside the NMI handler.) > > -hpa So that would be another solution I would expect. Would you rather I investigate that, or is the proposed solution more reasonable? Neil -- /*************************************************** *Neil Horman *Software Engineer *Red Hat, Inc. *nhorman@...hat.com *gpg keyid: 1024D / 0x92A74FA1 *http://pgp.mit.edu ***************************************************/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists