[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180622081924.GH2494@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 10:19:24 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>,
Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...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 04:05:02PM -0700, Fenghua Yu wrote:
> But in a real case, when I enable #AC for split lock in kernel, reboot
> hits #AC because of split lock in firmware code and firmware handles #AC
> as fatal error and stops continuing to run.
>
> It will take long time/forever for firmware to fix the split lock issue.
> Before the firmware issue is fixed, reboot or S4 cannot run if the feature
> is enabled by kernel.
Then it will take a long time / forever for people to use their machines
as they need. Don't you see that is a problem?
Either you take this real-time stuff serious and force BIOS monkeys to
get with the act, this includes no #AC but also very much force them
into abandoning SMM as a fail^Wfeature-platform.
Or it's all a joke and we'll continue to complain and shame..
> And if unlucky, I'm afraid the patch set even has no chance to be merged to
> upstream if maintainer's test machine has firmware split lock issue and the
> machine simply cannot reboot or go to S4 if the feature is enabled.
Well, then you'd better get those BIOS monkeys on board and fixing their
crap.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists