linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86: introduce NMI_AUTO as nmi

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 04 Nov 2009 07:33:17 -0500
From:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Aristeu Rozanski <aris@...hat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86: introduce NMI_AUTO as nmi_watchdog option

On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 12:46:30 +0100, Ingo Molnar said:
> What i'd like to see for the NMI watchdog is much more ambitious than 
> this: the use of perf events to run a periodic NMI callback.
> 
> The NMI watchdog would cause the creation of a per-cpu perf_event 
> structure (in-kernel). All x86 CPUs that have perf event support (the 
> majority of them) will thus be able to have an NMI watchdog using a 
> nice, generic piece of code and we'd be able to phase out the open-coded 
> NMI watchdog code.

What happens on older/smaller x86 CPUs that don't have any native support
for perf events?

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped