On Monday 06 October 2008 17:02, Andi Kleen wrote:
quoted text
> On Sat, Oct 04, 2008 at 07:32:54PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> > of recent regressions.
> >
> > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> > from 2.6.26.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> > (either way).
> >
> >
> > Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11569
> > Subject		: Don't complain about disabled irqs when the system has paniced
> > Submitter	: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
> > Date		: 2008-09-02 13:49 (33 days old)
> > References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122036356127282&w=4
>
> The problem is actually worse than this description suggests. I updated
> the bugzilla entry now.
>
> The new smp_call_function() that is called from panic is quite unsuitable
> for this task:
> - It allocates memory (not a good idea in panic0
> - It complains about interrupt off
> - This whole thing breaks at least machine checks

Why doesn't it use something like nmi_shootdown_cpus on panic rather than
the (I guess less reliable and longer latency) smp_send_stop?
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/