[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87eiw3a29h.fsf@basil.nowhere.org>
Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2009 12:06:02 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: ying.huang@...el.com, hpa@...or.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mingo@...e.hu, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [3/4] x86: MCE: Improve mce_get_rip
Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com> writes:
> Andi Kleen wrote:
>> From: Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
>>
>> Return rip/cs if MCG_STATUS_EIPV is set in mce_get_rip(). Remain m->cs
>> if RIP is read from rip_msr.
>
> It means we use "Error IP" as "Return IP" if RIPV=0 but EIPV=1 ...?
> Sounds strange.
It's not return IP, but "reported IP" in this case.
> Why this "forcing EIPV=1" still required?
> I think remaining this line will make something wrong.
Yes it's wrong. I'm dropping this in a later patch.
BTW current CPUs don't support this MSR anyways, it was a P4 only feature.
>
> I guess it would make much sense if we stop mixing RIP and EIP and rename
> the mce_get_rip() to mce_get_eip(), and the rip_msr to eip_msr too.
Ok fair enough. I admit the code was always a bit dubious.
> And then it would be acceptable if we print RIP with "!INEXACT!" annotation
> instead of printing precise EIP in case of RIPV=0 but EIPV=1.
Please send a patch to do all that.
-Andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
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