[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080724120512.GA21804@lenovo>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 16:05:12 +0400
From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
To: Martin Wilck <martin.wilck@...itsu-siemens.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"Wichert, Gerhard" <Gerhard.Wichert@...itsu-siemens.com>,
"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86 (64): make calibrate_APIC_clock() smp-safe
[Martin Wilck - Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 01:58:37PM +0200]
> Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
>
>> Hi, but what if SMI flood happens? We could stuck here forever, don't we?
>>
>> - Cyrill -
>
>
> Yes, if the SMI flood never ends. But you wouldn't want to work on such
> a system anyway (with the current kernel code, your APIC timer would
> most probably be miscalibrated, which can have the weirdest effects).
>
> Anyway, we can add a maximum iteration count to the patch so that there
> is no risk of getting stuck.
>
> Martin
>
> --
> Martin Wilck
> PRIMERGY System Software Engineer
> FSC IP ESP DEV 6
>
> Fujitsu Siemens Computers GmbH
> Heinz-Nixdorf-Ring 1
> 33106 Paderborn
> Germany
>
> Tel: ++49 5251 8 15113
> Fax: ++49 5251 8 20209
> Email: mailto:martin.wilck@...itsu-siemens.com
> Internet: http://www.fujitsu-siemens.com
> Company Details: http://www.fujitsu-siemens.com/imprint.html
>
yes, it will issue some effects but it's better then stuck there.
More over in 'case of SMI flood with current patch you don't get
error message printed i think so you better add max iteration
counter so user will see on console (or whatever) that he is got
problems.
- Cyrill -
--
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