linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -v3] perf, x86: try to handle unknown nmis with running perfctrs

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20100827193349.GS22783@erda.amd.com>
Date:	Fri, 27 Aug 2010 21:33:49 +0200
From:	Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>
To:	Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>
CC:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
	Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@...el.com>,
	"fweisbec@...il.com" <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>,
	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v3] perf, x86: try to handle unknown nmis with running
 perfctrs

On 27.08.10 14:57:44, Don Zickus wrote:
> From: Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>
> Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 14:43:03 -0400
> Subject: [PATCH] [x86] perf: fix accidentally ack'ing a second event on intel perf counter
> 
> During testing of a patch to stop having the perf subsytem swallow nmis,
> it was uncovered that Nehalem boxes were randomly getting unknown nmis
> when using the perf tool.
> 
> Moving the ack'ing of the PMI closer to when we get the status allows
> the hardware to properly re-set the PMU bit signaling another PMI was
> triggered during the processing of the first PMI.  This allows the new
> logic for dealing with the shortcomings of multiple PMIs to handle the
> extra NMI by 'eat'ing it later.
> 
> Now one can wonder why are we getting a second PMI when we disable all
> the PMUs in the begining of the NMI handler to prevent such a case, for
> that I do not know.  But I know the fix below helps deal with this quirk.
> 
> Tested on multiple Nehalems where the problem was occuring.  With the
> patch, the code now loops a second time to handle the second PMI (whereas
> before it was not).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>

Looks good to me. Thanks Don.

-Robert

-- 
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Operating System Research Center

--
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/