Re: [PATCH RFC] NMI Re-introduce un[set]_nmi_callback

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Andi Kleen
Date: Thursday, September 4, 2008 - 10:52 am

On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 01:20:52PM -0400, Don Zickus wrote:

That's my point. If you have drivers which can identify all other
NMIs then the left over NMIs must come from that watchdog driver.
So they just need drivers which can do that for their chipsets.

It's not race free, but that's simply not possible with the x86
NMI architecture.

Better would be probably to just configure the watchdog 
to reboot the system directly on its own. Most other watchdogs
I'm aware of do that. That's more reliable anyways because the system
might be wedged enough to not be able to process NMIs anymore.


To be fully reliable: you need a new NMI architecture or move the event
somewhere else.
To be reasonable reliable (assuming NMis are not very frequent): you
need drivers for all NMI sources that can identify them.

-Andi
-- 
ak@linux.intel.com
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH RFC] NMI Re-introduce un[set]_nmi_callback, Prarit Bhargava, (Thu Sep 4, 6:07 am)
Re: [PATCH RFC] NMI Re-introduce un[set]_nmi_callback, Peter Zijlstra, (Thu Sep 4, 6:37 am)
Re: [PATCH RFC] NMI Re-introduce un[set]_nmi_callback, Prarit Bhargava, (Thu Sep 4, 7:29 am)
Re: [PATCH RFC] NMI Re-introduce un[set]_nmi_callback, H. Peter Anvin, (Thu Sep 4, 8:12 am)
Re: [PATCH RFC] NMI Re-introduce un[set]_nmi_callback, Andi Kleen, (Thu Sep 4, 10:52 am)
Re: [PATCH RFC] NMI Re-introduce un[set]_nmi_callback, Vivek Goyal, (Thu Sep 4, 12:08 pm)
RE: [PATCH RFC] NMI Re-introduce un[set]_nmi_callback, Mingarelli, Thomas, (Thu Sep 4, 1:01 pm)
RE: [PATCH RFC] NMI Re-introduce un[set]_nmi_callback, Mingarelli, Thomas, (Thu Sep 4, 1:21 pm)
RE: [PATCH RFC] NMI Re-introduce un[set]_nmi_callback, Mingarelli, Thomas, (Thu Sep 4, 2:05 pm)