[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <af88b0d6c81fbf480eee4cef120ff710.squirrel@www.firstfloor.org>
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2011 01:14:55 +0200
From: "Andi Kleen" <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: "Jeremy Fitzhardinge" <jeremy@...p.org>
Cc: "Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>,
"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>,
"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Nick Piggin" <npiggin@...nel.dk>, "Avi Kivity" <avi@...hat.com>,
"Marcelo Tosatti" <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
"KVM" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, "Andi Kleen" <andi@...stfloor.org>,
"Xen Devel" <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
"Jeremy Fitzhardinge" <jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com>,
"Stefano Stabellini" <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/13] xen/pvticketlock: disable interrupts while
blocking
> But, erm, does that even make sense? I'm assuming the NMI reason port
> tells the CPU why it got an NMI. If multiple CPUs can get NMIs and
> there's only a single reason port, then doesn't that mean that either 1)
> they all got the NMI for the same reason, or 2) having a single port is
> inherently racy? How does the locking actually work there?
All the code to determine NMI reasons is inherently racy,
and each new NMI user makes it worse.
-Andi
--
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