[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZHupKtSqj1LC911k@a4bf019067fa.jf.intel.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2023 13:57:14 -0700
From: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
CC: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <x86@...nel.org>,
Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...ux.intel.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"Tony Luck" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Arjan van de Veen <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Eric Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 6/6] x86/smp: Put CPUs into INIT on shutdown if possible
On Sat, Jun 03, 2023 at 10:07:04PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Parking CPUs in a HLT loop is not completely safe vs. kexec() as HLT can
> resume execution due to NMI, SMI and MCE, which has the same issue as the
> MWAIT loop.
>
> Kicking the secondary CPUs into INIT makes this safe against NMI and SMI.
>
> A broadcast MCE will take the machine down, but a broadcast MCE which makes
> HLT resume and execute overwritten text, pagetables or data will end up in
> a disaster too.
>
> So chose the lesser of two evils and kick the secondary CPUs into INIT
> unless the system has installed special wakeup mechanisms which are not
> using INIT.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
For the whole series.
Reviewed-by: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists