| 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: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 14:14:35 -0600
From: Corey Minyard <minyard@....org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 4/4] ipmi: add new IPMI nmi watchdog handling
On Thu, Feb 15, 2007 at 02:21:24PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 09:49:15 -0600
> Corey Minyard <minyard@....org> wrote:
>
> > So I see the following options besides what's already there:
> >
> > 1) add asm/kdebug.h and DIE_NMI_POST to everything that might have an
> > IPMI implementation.
> > 2) use CONFIG_X86 to tell if NMI will work, since that's the only thing
> > it will work on at the present.
> >
> > I don't have any way to know how different systems have implemented that
> > feature, so I can't actually implement it for the various architectures
> > (plus I don't have any of those boards). So maybe #2 is the best?
>
> I tend to think that #1 is the best option - it keeps things consistent
> and it gives arch/board maintainers a framework in which to add the
> support code at their leisure. But it's something which would be best
> worked through with the affected arch maintainers, please.
>
> Which architectures are we talking about here? ia64 and ppc?
Reduce the "gruesomness" of the IPMI NMI watchdog handling.
Basically, I've looked at this and thought about it a while, and
the only reasonable architecture that will currently support this
is x86. Anything else is just a pipe dream and the implementation
would be quite different and difficult to predict. So just make
this x86-only for now and remove all the junk that is no longer
necessary.
Suitable for merging into the previous patch.
Signed-off-by: Corey Minyard <minyard@....org>
Index: linux-2.6.20/arch/i386/Kconfig.debug
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.20.orig/arch/i386/Kconfig.debug
+++ linux-2.6.20/arch/i386/Kconfig.debug
@@ -4,10 +4,6 @@ config TRACE_IRQFLAGS_SUPPORT
bool
default y
-config HAVE_STANDARD_NOTIFY_DIE
- bool
- default y
-
source "lib/Kconfig.debug"
config EARLY_PRINTK
Index: linux-2.6.20/arch/x86_64/Kconfig.debug
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.20.orig/arch/x86_64/Kconfig.debug
+++ linux-2.6.20/arch/x86_64/Kconfig.debug
@@ -4,10 +4,6 @@ config TRACE_IRQFLAGS_SUPPORT
bool
default y
-config HAVE_STANDARD_NOTIFY_DIE
- bool
- default y
-
source "lib/Kconfig.debug"
config DEBUG_RODATA
Index: linux-2.6.20/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_watchdog.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.20.orig/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_watchdog.c
+++ linux-2.6.20/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_watchdog.c
@@ -51,8 +51,17 @@
#include <linux/ctype.h>
#include <linux/delay.h>
#include <asm/atomic.h>
-#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_STANDARD_NOTIFY_DIE
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_X86
+/* This is ugly, but I've determined that x86 is the only architecture
+ that can reasonably support the IPMI NMI watchdog timeout at this
+ time. If another architecture adds this capability somehow, it
+ will have to be a somewhat different mechanism and I have no idea
+ how it will work. So in the unlikely event that another
+ architecture supports this, we can figure out a good generic
+ mechanism for it at that time. */
#include <asm/kdebug.h>
+#define HAVE_DIE_NMI_POST
#endif
#define PFX "IPMI Watchdog: "
@@ -364,6 +373,10 @@ static int i_ipmi_set_timeout(struct ipm
int hbnow = 0;
+ /* These can be cleared as we are setting the timeout. */
+ ipmi_start_timer_on_heartbeat = 0;
+ pretimeout_since_last_heartbeat = 0;
+
data[0] = 0;
WDOG_SET_TIMER_USE(data[0], WDOG_TIMER_USE_SMS_OS);
@@ -438,13 +451,12 @@ static int ipmi_set_timeout(int do_heart
wait_for_completion(&set_timeout_wait);
+ mutex_unlock(&set_timeout_lock);
+
if ((do_heartbeat == IPMI_SET_TIMEOUT_FORCE_HB)
|| ((send_heartbeat_now)
&& (do_heartbeat == IPMI_SET_TIMEOUT_HB_IF_NECESSARY)))
- {
rv = ipmi_heartbeat();
- }
- mutex_unlock(&set_timeout_lock);
out:
return rv;
@@ -524,12 +536,10 @@ static int ipmi_heartbeat(void)
int rv;
struct ipmi_system_interface_addr addr;
- if (ipmi_ignore_heartbeat) {
+ if (ipmi_ignore_heartbeat)
return 0;
- }
if (ipmi_start_timer_on_heartbeat) {
- ipmi_start_timer_on_heartbeat = 0;
ipmi_watchdog_state = action_val;
return ipmi_set_timeout(IPMI_SET_TIMEOUT_FORCE_HB);
} else if (pretimeout_since_last_heartbeat) {
@@ -537,7 +547,6 @@ static int ipmi_heartbeat(void)
We don't want to set the action, though, we want to
leave that alone (thus it can't be combined with the
above operation. */
- pretimeout_since_last_heartbeat = 0;
return ipmi_set_timeout(IPMI_SET_TIMEOUT_HB_IF_NECESSARY);
}
Index: linux-2.6.20/include/asm-i386/kdebug.h
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.20.orig/include/asm-i386/kdebug.h
+++ linux-2.6.20/include/asm-i386/kdebug.h
@@ -42,8 +42,6 @@ enum die_val {
DIE_PAGE_FAULT,
};
-#define HAVE_DIE_NMI_POST
-
static inline int notify_die(enum die_val val, const char *str,
struct pt_regs *regs, long err, int trap, int sig)
{
Index: linux-2.6.20/include/asm-x86_64/kdebug.h
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.20.orig/include/asm-x86_64/kdebug.h
+++ linux-2.6.20/include/asm-x86_64/kdebug.h
@@ -37,8 +37,6 @@ enum die_val {
DIE_PAGE_FAULT,
};
-#define HAVE_DIE_NMI_POST
-
static inline int notify_die(enum die_val val, const char *str,
struct pt_regs *regs, long err, int trap, int sig)
{
-
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