[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A891E17.1090901@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 18:08:39 +0900
From: Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com,
ak@...ux.intel.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [boot crash] Re: [tip:x86/mce3] x86, mce: use 64bit machine check
code on 32bit
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
>> Could you try boot your laptop with mce=nobootlog?
>
> Hm, why should that make any difference? mce=nobootlog only
> influences whether we pass records into the mcelog buffer but does
> not affect whether we touch the hardware.
Old mce codes doesn't take bootlog.
One possibility is: if the BIOS doesn't clear status in banks,
new mce codes will try to log such junks.
If the junk is totally junk but can be decoded as a valid log with
MISCV or ADDRV bit, and if the cpu try to access register which is
not implemented (e.g. IA32_MCi_MISC/ADDR), then such access might
cause a general protection exception. (ref. ASDM 3A 15.3.2.3)
I'm just guessing...
Thanks,
H.Seto
--
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