[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170324173515.GB10746@leverpostej>
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 17:35:15 +0000
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
To: Doug Berger <opendmb@...il.com>
Cc: catalin.marinas@....com, robh+dt@...nel.org, will.deacon@....com,
computersforpeace@...il.com, gregory.0xf0@...il.com,
f.fainelli@...il.com, bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com,
wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com, james.morse@....com,
vladimir.murzin@....com, panand@...hat.com, andre.przywara@....com,
cmetcalf@...lanox.com, mingo@...nel.org,
sandeepa.s.prabhu@...il.com, shijie.huang@....com,
linus.walleij@...aro.org, treding@...dia.com, jonathanh@...dia.com,
olof@...om.net, mirza.krak@...il.com, suzuki.poulose@....com,
bgolaszewski@...libre.com, horms+renesas@...ge.net.au,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] arm64: mm: install SError abort handler
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 09:48:40AM -0700, Doug Berger wrote:
> On 03/24/2017 08:16 AM, Mark Rutland wrote:
> >On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 07:46:26AM -0700, Doug Berger wrote:
> If you would consider an alternative implementation where we scrap
> the SError handler (i.e. maintain the ugliness in our downstream
> kernel) in favor of a more gentle user mode crash on SError that
> allows the kernel the opportunity to service the interrupt for
> diagnostic purposes I could try to repackage that.
If this is just for diagnostic purposes, I believe you can register a
panic notifier, which can then read from the bus. The panic will occur,
but you'll have the opportunity to log some information to dmesg.
Thanks,
Mark.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists