[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140619193635.1949b469@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2014 19:36:35 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
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 Fri, 20 Jun 2014 01:27:26 +0200 (CEST)
Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz> wrote:
>
> I don't think there is a need for a global stop_machine()-like
> synchronization here. The printing CPU will be sending IPI to the CPU N+1
> only after it has finished printing CPU N stacktrace.
So you plan on sending an IPI to a CPU then wait for it to acknowledge
that it is spinning, and then print out the data and then tell the CPU
it can stop spinning?
-- Steve
--
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