[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <488889B6.9070707@fujitsu-siemens.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 15:55:02 +0200
From: Martin Wilck <martin.wilck@...itsu-siemens.com>
To: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.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() SMI-safe
Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> 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 -
I disagree. If you have a system that generates SMIs in this extreme
frequency, you're better off stuck than running on such an unstable
system. The user _will_ see messages on the console if this happens.
Note that apparently there are few people who have trouble with this. We
did see problems, but never had more than 1 SMI disturbing the
calibration procedure.
Anyway, here is another patch that defines max iteration counts. I
haven't added a "Signed-off:" line, because I prefer the original version.
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
View attachment "calibrate_APIC_clock-2.diff" of type "text/x-patch" (2341 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists