[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120312133619.GB17288@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 09:36:19 -0400
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
To: Fernando Luis Vázquez Cao
<fernando@....ntt.co.jp>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>,
linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
kexec@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mingo@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...e.hu,
Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] boot: ignore early NMIs
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 03:14:20PM +0900, Fernando Luis Vázquez Cao wrote:
[..]
> The thing is that we want to avoid playing with hardware in the kdump
> reboot patch when we can avoid it, the premise being that it cannot
> be accessed without risking a lockup or worse (as the deadlock accessing
> the I/O APIC showed).
I think there needs to be a limit to being paranoid. On one hand people
want to run panic notifiers, all the kmsg_dump() hooks in panic path, and
on the other hand we are afraid of even disabling LAPIC.
I personally think that disabling LAPIC is reasonably practical solution
to the problem until and unless somebody shows that it deadlocks easily.
Thanks
Vivek
--
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