[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170222185015.GA6141@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 10:50:16 -0800
From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To: Xunlei Pang <xlpang@...hat.com>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kexec@...ts.infradead.org, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>,
Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>,
Junichi Nomura <j-nomura@...jp.nec.com>,
Kiyoshi Ueda <k-ueda@...jp.nec.com>,
Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] x86/mce: Don't participate in rendezvous process once
nmi_shootdown_cpus() was made
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 12:11:14PM +0800, Xunlei Pang wrote:
> + /*
> + * Cases to bail out to avoid rendezvous process timeout:
> + * 1)If this CPU is offline.
> + * 2)If crashing_cpu was set, e.g. entering kdump,
> + * we need to skip cpus remaining in 1st kernel.
> + */
> + if (cpu_is_offline(cpu) ||
> + (crashing_cpu != -1 && crashing_cpu != cpu)) {
> u64 mcgstatus;
>
> mcgstatus = mce_rdmsrl(MSR_IA32_MCG_STATUS);
I think we should document the remaining race conditions. I don't
think there is any good way to eliminate them, and they are already
pretty small windows.
I think the sequence of events looks like:
1 Panic occurs
2 nmi_shootdown_cpus() sets crashing_cpu
3 send NMI to everyone else
4 wait up to a second for other CPUs to take NMI
5 go to kexec code
6 start new kernel
7 new kernel establishes #MC handler
If one of the other cpus triggers a machine check while
getting to, or in, the NMI handler ... then that cpu will
skip processing (if RIPV is set).
Between '2' and '5' if crashing_cpu gets a machine check it
will execute in the old kernel handler, and do the right thing.
There's a fuzzy area between '6' and '7' where a machine check
might not end up in the right code.
>From '7' onwards the kexec kernel will handle and machine
checks caused by kdump.
-Tony
Powered by blists - more mailing lists