From: Tony Luck <tony.luck@gmail.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Robert <elliott@hpe.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@ml01.01.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 1/3] x86: Expand exception table to allow new handling options
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2016 17:15:42 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+8MBbLZ2Di4Gx+9buTA0kcPc2+ogxw5xzOLJon=FEM5hC3bBQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrUAO3gYiVpi5BO+o6=bika2D9JFZJ4xa9Ph8ArGMfftgA@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 2:32 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:
> Step 1: determine that the HW context is, in principle, recoverable.
>
> Step 2: ask the handler to try to recover.
>
> Step 3: if the handler doesn't recover, panic
>
> I'm not saying that restructuring the code like this should be a
> prerequisite for merging this, but I'm wondering whether it would make
> sense at some point in the future.
For the local machine check case this all looks simple. For the broadcast
case it's pretty incompatible with the current code structure. For a machine
check triggered someplace in the kernel w/o a new style fixup handler we'd
start by saying ... "sure, that's plausible to recover from". Then after we let
all the other CPUs return from the machine check handler we'd take it
back and say "just kidding, we're going down". It might work, but it would
be a messier panic than we have now.
Definitely food for thought for some future cleanups.
-Tony
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Tony Luck <tony.luck@gmail.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Robert <elliott@hpe.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@ml01.01.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 1/3] x86: Expand exception table to allow new handling options
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2016 17:15:42 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+8MBbLZ2Di4Gx+9buTA0kcPc2+ogxw5xzOLJon=FEM5hC3bBQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrUAO3gYiVpi5BO+o6=bika2D9JFZJ4xa9Ph8ArGMfftgA@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, Jan 9, 2016 at 2:32 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:
> Step 1: determine that the HW context is, in principle, recoverable.
>
> Step 2: ask the handler to try to recover.
>
> Step 3: if the handler doesn't recover, panic
>
> I'm not saying that restructuring the code like this should be a
> prerequisite for merging this, but I'm wondering whether it would make
> sense at some point in the future.
For the local machine check case this all looks simple. For the broadcast
case it's pretty incompatible with the current code structure. For a machine
check triggered someplace in the kernel w/o a new style fixup handler we'd
start by saying ... "sure, that's plausible to recover from". Then after we let
all the other CPUs return from the machine check handler we'd take it
back and say "just kidding, we're going down". It might work, but it would
be a messier panic than we have now.
Definitely food for thought for some future cleanups.
-Tony
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-10 1:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 72+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-09 0:04 [PATCH v8 0/3] Machine check recovery when kernel accesses poison Tony Luck
2016-01-09 0:04 ` Tony Luck
2015-12-31 19:40 ` [PATCH v8 2/3] x86, mce: Check for faults tagged in EXTABLE_CLASS_FAULT exception table entries Tony Luck
2015-12-31 19:40 ` Tony Luck
2016-01-08 20:49 ` [PATCH v8 1/3] x86: Expand exception table to allow new handling options Tony Luck
2016-01-08 20:49 ` Tony Luck
2016-01-09 1:52 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-01-09 1:52 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-01-09 3:39 ` Brian Gerst
2016-01-09 3:39 ` Brian Gerst
2016-01-09 4:31 ` Brian Gerst
2016-01-09 4:31 ` Brian Gerst
2016-01-09 6:36 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-01-09 6:36 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-01-11 23:09 ` Brian Gerst
2016-01-11 23:09 ` Brian Gerst
2016-01-11 23:22 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-01-11 23:22 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-01-11 23:48 ` Luck, Tony
2016-01-11 23:48 ` Luck, Tony
2016-01-09 17:45 ` Tony Luck
2016-01-09 17:45 ` Tony Luck
2016-01-09 18:00 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-01-09 18:00 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-01-09 19:51 ` Tony Luck
2016-01-09 19:51 ` Tony Luck
2016-01-09 22:32 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-01-09 22:32 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-01-10 1:15 ` Tony Luck [this message]
2016-01-10 1:15 ` Tony Luck
2016-01-11 0:25 ` Luck, Tony
2016-01-11 0:25 ` Luck, Tony
2016-01-08 21:18 ` [PATCH v8 3/3] x86, mce: Add __mcsafe_copy() Tony Luck
2016-01-08 21:18 ` Tony Luck
2016-01-09 1:49 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-01-09 1:49 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-01-09 17:48 ` Tony Luck
2016-01-09 17:48 ` Tony Luck
2016-01-09 17:57 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-01-09 17:57 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-01-09 19:39 ` Tony Luck
2016-01-09 19:39 ` Tony Luck
2016-01-09 22:15 ` Dan Williams
2016-01-09 22:15 ` Dan Williams
2016-01-09 22:33 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-01-09 22:33 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-01-10 0:23 ` Dan Williams
2016-01-10 0:23 ` Dan Williams
2016-01-10 1:40 ` Tony Luck
2016-01-10 1:40 ` Tony Luck
2016-01-10 11:26 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-01-10 11:26 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-01-11 10:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-01-11 10:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-01-13 23:22 ` Tony Luck
2016-01-13 23:22 ` Tony Luck
2016-01-14 4:39 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-01-14 4:39 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-01-30 0:35 ` Tony Luck
2016-01-30 0:35 ` Tony Luck
2016-01-30 10:28 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-01-30 10:28 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-02-01 23:10 ` Tony Luck
2016-02-01 23:10 ` Tony Luck
2016-02-01 23:16 ` Dan Williams
2016-02-01 23:16 ` Dan Williams
2016-01-12 0:26 ` Luck, Tony
2016-01-12 0:26 ` Luck, Tony
2016-01-12 0:30 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-01-12 0:30 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-01-12 0:37 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-01-12 0:37 ` Andy Lutomirski
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CA+8MBbLZ2Di4Gx+9buTA0kcPc2+ogxw5xzOLJon=FEM5hC3bBQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=tony.luck@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=elliott@hpe.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-nvdimm@ml01.01.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.