[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180621224203.GA18979@romley-ivt3.sc.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 15:42:03 -0700
From: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>,
Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
Rafael Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>,
Ravi V Shankar <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86 <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/16] x86/split_lock: Enable #AC exception for split
locked accesses
On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 03:18:19PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 06/21/2018 03:08 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 03:00:03PM -0700, Fenghua Yu wrote:
> >> The control knob for kernel is to choose re-executing the faulting
> >> instruction (default) or kernel panic. Kernel panic may be useful in hard
> >> real time which has less tolerant to bad performance.
> > The kernel should never trigger this, ever. Any #AC is a plain bug and
> > should be fixed. So unconditional WARN+disable is suffient.
>
> It sounds like we need to start with that functionality and then if
> Fenghua wants to do more, we have add-on patches that can be evaluated
> by themselves.
For split lock in kernel, by default, I just do warning, disable feature
in #AC handler, continue to execute the faulting instruction, and re-enable
#AC for split lock after a delay. This is the default behavior in the
current patches.
By "WAR+disable", you mean I just do this default behavior and remove the
control knob?
Thanks.
-Fenghua
Powered by blists - more mailing lists