[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150306082846.GC3514@pd.tnic>
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 09:28:46 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>
Cc: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Junichi Nomura <j-nomura@...jp.nec.com>,
Kiyoshi Ueda <k-ueda@...jp.nec.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] x86: mce: kexec: switch MCE handler for kexec/kdump
On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 09:37:52AM +0000, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> print_mce() doesn't help?
No, it doesn't because it does a bunch of MCA-specific things too.
> Currently quirk_no_way_out() is set only for a specific CPU model, so even
> if we define another callback for kdump code, setting it to a real function
> need to be done in MCE internal function, __mcheck_cpu_apply_quirks() ?
>
> It seems that in this version I relied on reusing exisiting code too much.
> So I'll do only what I really need. Then, if the model specific behavior
> (what quirk_sandybridge_ifu() does) doesn't affect machine_check_under_kdump()'s
> behavior, simply stop copying this part is a right thing to do?
Just add this to mce.c in a pre-patch:
void mce_mc_callback(void *arg)
{
if (quirk_no_way_out)
quirk_no_way_out(i, m, regs);
}
I'm still not madly in love with it but I can't think of something
better. Maybe Tony would have a better idea...
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
--
--
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