[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87oa3iu165.fsf@ashishki-desk.ger.corp.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 16:54:26 +0300
From: Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian@...akpoint.cc>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, vince@...ter.net, eranian@...gle.com,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf/x86/intel/bts: don't dereference ds unconditionally
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com> writes:
> Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian@...akpoint.cc> writes:
>
>> From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
>>
>> Since commit 4d4c47412464 ("perf/x86/intel/bts: Fix BTS PMI detection")
>> my box goes boom on boot:
>>
>> | .... node #0, CPUs: #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7
>> | BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 0000000000000018
>> | IP: [<ffffffff8100c463>] intel_bts_interrupt+0x43/0x130
>> | Call Trace:
>> | <NMI> d [<ffffffff8100b341>] intel_pmu_handle_irq+0x51/0x4b0
>> | [<ffffffff81004d47>] perf_event_nmi_handler+0x27/0x40
>>
>> I don't know what is going on here but ds is not always dereferenced
>> unconditionally hence here the `ds' check to avoid the crash.
>
> Good catch! I'm going to guess you don't have the NMI watchdog enabled?
That is to say,
Reviewed-by: Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists