[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1406200100520.15014@pobox.suse.cz>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 01:03:28 +0200 (CEST)
From: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Dave Anderson <anderson@...hat.com>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] x86/nmi: Print all cpu stacks from NMI safely
On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > The idea basically is to *switch* what arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace()
> > and arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace_handler() are doing; i.e. use the NMI
> > as a way to stop all the CPUs (one by one), and let the CPU that is
> > sending the NMIs around to actually walk and dump the stacks of the CPUs
> > receiving the NMI IPI.
>
> And this is cleaner? Stopping a CPU via NMI and then what happens if
> something else goes wrong and that CPU never starts back up? This
> sounds like something that can cause more problems than it was
> reporting on.
It's going to get NMI in exactly the same situations it does with the
current arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace(), the only difference being that
it doesn't try to invoke printk() from inside NMI. The IPI-NMI is used
solely as a point of synchronization for the stack dumping.
> Then you also need to print out the data while the NMIs still spin.
Exactly, that's actually the whole point.
Thanks,
--
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
--
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