[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <58AE7B82.2040008@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 14:04:50 +0800
From: Xunlei Pang <xpang@...hat.com>
To: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>, 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 02/23/2017 at 02:50 AM, Luck, Tony wrote:
> 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.
>
Agree, will update the comment.
Regards,
Xunlei
Powered by blists - more mailing lists