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

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Vivek Goyal
Date: Thursday, September 4, 2008 - 2:46 pm

On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 05:24:53PM -0400, Don Zickus wrote:

In theory, you could do the same while registering the handler on die
chain?

I don't get the whole point. So we are looking for a system where no body
else uses an NMI for any purpose and the moment NMI happens, this driver
will go and panic() the system. I don't get, what do we achive by that?

Looks like you got some device in platform which raises an NMI and which
indicates that something is wrong and log the message and do a panic(). 
But you don't have a way to find out if that device has raised the
interrupt or something else has raised the NMI, hence you want to stop the
watchdog timer and assume any NMI henceforth is from device?

So any functionality which is dependent on NMI, will not work as long as
this driver is loaded. 

Thanks
Vivek
--
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, 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)
Re: [PATCH RFC] NMI Re-introduce un[set]_nmi_callback, Vivek Goyal, (Thu Sep 4, 2:46 pm)