[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120210210423.GJ5650@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 16:04:23 -0500
From: Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@...il.com>,
Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...il.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, kvm <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
x86 <x86@...nel.org>,
Suresh B Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
Subject: Re: WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/smp.c:119
native_smp_send_reschedule+0x25/0x43()
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 09:36:03PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-02-10 at 15:31 -0500, Don Zickus wrote:
> > So my second patch which I will eventually post will just skip the WARN_ON
> > if the system is going down. Not sure if that is the proper way to address
> > this problem or change all of the stop_this_cpu code to use a different
> > bitmask than the cpu_online bitmask (but then you run the risk of a stuck
> > IPI I guess if the cpu is halted without notifying anyone).
>
> Yeah, the async hard kill of all cpus is bound to make problems.. what
> I'm wondering is, why is this in the normal shutdown path and not
> specific to a hard panic?
I didn't write the original code, I just changed it from REBOOT_IRQ to
NMI and left all the stop_this_cpu stuff alone.
>
> Trying to make this work is just not going to be pretty, and in the
> panic case we really don't care much.
Sure.
Cheers,
Don
--
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