[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <47fe0d37-93d9-1394-062a-f973a38daa16@linux.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 18:53:34 -0800
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>
Cc: Yu Chen <yu.c.chen@...el.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Rui Zhang <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Kexec Mailing List <kexec@...ts.infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
ebiederm@...hat.com, Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: kexec reboot fails with extra wbinvd introduced for AME SME
>
> Does anybody have any other ideas?
wbinvd is thankfully not common, but also not rare (MTRR setup and a bunch of other cases)
and in some other operating systems it happens even more than on Linux.. it's generally not totally broken like this.
I can only imagine a machine check case where a write back to a bad cell causes some parity error
or something... but it's odd that no other machine checks are reported?
(can the user check for this please)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists