[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121127145505.GA14805@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 09:55:05 -0500
From: Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>
To: Prasad Koya <prasad.koya@...il.com>
Cc: aarcange@...hat.com, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: vmalloc_sync_all(), 64bit kernel, patches
9c48f1c629ecfa114850c03f875c6691003214de,
a79e53d85683c6dd9f99c90511028adc2043031f
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 03:06:53PM -0800, Prasad Koya wrote:
> Hi
>
> Before going into crashkernel, nmi_shootdown_cpus() calls
> register_die_notifier(), which calls vmalloc_sync_all(). I'm seeing
> lockup in sync_global_pgds() (init_64.c). From 3.2 and up,
> register_die_notifier() is replaced with register_nmi_handler() (patch
> 9c48f1c629ecfa114850c03f875c6691003214de), which doesn't call
> vmalloc_sync_all(). Is it ok to skip vmalloc_sync_all() in this path?
> I see sync_global_pgds() was touched by this patch:
> a79e53d85683c6dd9f99c90511028adc2043031f. There are no virtual
> machines involved and I see lockups at times.
What problems are you seeing? What are you trying to solve?
Cheers,
Don
>
> thank you.
> Prasad
>
> /* Halt all other CPUs, calling the specified function on each of them
> *
> * This function can be used to halt all other CPUs on crash
> @@ -794,7 +784,8 @@ void nmi_shootdown_cpus(nmi_shootdown_cb callback)
>
> atomic_set(&waiting_for_crash_ipi, num_online_cpus() - 1);
> /* Would it be better to replace the trap vector here? */
> - if (register_die_notifier(&crash_nmi_nb))
> + if (register_nmi_handler(NMI_LOCAL, crash_nmi_callback,
> + NMI_FLAG_FIRST, "crash"))
> return; /* return what? */
--
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