linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 1/3] Unified NMI delayed call mechanism

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <AANLkTinaPhAcGra6JdmHCVcj9HrNyG2TP91-A8AnQMZE@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 18 Jun 2010 21:40:41 +0800
From:	huang ying <huang.ying.caritas@...il.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com>,
	Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>,
	"Fr??d??ric Weisbecker" <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/3] Unified NMI delayed call mechanism

On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 8:45 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
>> >> [...] ??At least APEI will use NMI to report some hardware events (likely
>> >> error) to kernel. ??So I suppose we will go to have a delayed call as an
>> >> event handler for APEI.
>> >
>> > Yep, that makes sense. I wasnt arguing against the functionality itself, i
>> > was arguing against the illogical layering that limits its utility. By
>> > making it part of perf events it becomes a generic part of that framework
>> > and can be used by anything that deals with events and uses that
>> > framework.
>>
>> I think the the 'layering' in the patchset helps instead of 'limits' its
>> utility. It is designed to be as general as possible, so that it can be used
>> by both perf and other NMI users. Do you think so?
>
> What other NMI users do you mean? EDAC/MCE is going to go utilize events as
> well (away from the horrible /dev/mcelog interface), the NMI watchdog already
> did it and the perf tool obviously does as well. There's a few leftovers like
> kcrash which isnt really event centric and i dont think it needs to be
> converted.

But why not just make it more general? It does not hurt anyone including perf.

Best Regards,
Huang Ying
--
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/