[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080904172052.GN3400@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 13:20:52 -0400
From: Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, arozansk@...hat.com,
Thomas.Mingarelli@...com, ak@...ux.intel.com,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] NMI Re-introduce un[set]_nmi_callback
On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 05:52:17PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Then if there's a chipset specific NMI driver it could
> also check if the chipset raised it. That would be a possible
> solution for HP -- they would need to implement such a driver
> for their systems with the special watchdog.
The thing with HP's special watchdog timer is that it does _not_ have a
chipset specific NMI it is trying to catch. HP is going on the assumption
that _all_ NMIs are /bad/ and they want to catch _every_ NMI, log it, and
reboot the system.
Now obviously NMIs from kgdb and oprofile are not the ones a system should
panic on but this breaks HP's assumptions.
So that is part of the problem. How do you become a catch-all for NMIs in
a system, to process as you wish, but ignore all the 'safe' NMIs?
Cheers,
Don
--
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