[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51E595C6.9020708@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 00:19:42 +0530
From: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC: Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>, mingo@...hat.com, jeremy@...p.org,
x86@...nel.org, konrad.wilk@...cle.com, hpa@...or.com,
pbonzini@...hat.com, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
habanero@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com,
mtosatti@...hat.com, stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com,
andi@...stfloor.org, attilio.rao@...rix.com, ouyang@...pitt.edu,
gregkh@...e.de, agraf@...e.de, chegu_vinod@...com,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, avi.kivity@...il.com,
tglx@...utronix.de, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, riel@...hat.com, drjones@...hat.com,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
srivatsa.vaddagiri@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC V10 15/18] kvm : Paravirtual ticketlocks support for
linux guests running on KVM hypervisor
On 07/16/2013 09:18 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 09:02:15AM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>> BTW can NMI handler take spinlocks?
>
> No -- that is, yes you can using trylock, but you still shouldn't.
Thanks Peter for the clarification.
I had started checking few of nmi handlers code to confirm.
Did saw a raw spinlock in drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c, but then stopped.
>
>> If it can what happens if NMI is
>> delivered in a section protected by local_irq_save()/local_irq_restore()?
>
> You deadlock.
>
--
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