From: "Liu, Chuansheng" <chuansheng.liu@intel.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>,
"tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"hpa@zytor.com" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] x86/mce/therm_throt: Fix the access of uninitialized therm_work
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2020 09:22:06 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <27240C0AC20F114CBF8149A2696CBE4A615FC2FF@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200106070759.GB12238@zn.tnic>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
> Sent: Monday, January 6, 2020 3:08 PM
> To: Liu, Chuansheng <chuansheng.liu@intel.com>
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Luck, Tony <tony.luck@intel.com>;
> tglx@linutronix.de; mingo@redhat.com; hpa@zytor.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/mce/therm_throt: Fix the access of uninitialized
> therm_work
>
> On Mon, Jan 06, 2020 at 06:41:55AM +0000, Chuansheng Liu wrote:
> > In ICL platform, it is easy to hit bootup failure with panic
> > in thermal interrupt handler during early bootup stage.
> >
> > Such issue makes my platform almost can not boot up with
> > latest kernel code.
> >
> > The call stack is like:
> > kernel BUG at kernel/timer/timer.c:1152!
> >
> > Call Trace:
> > __queue_delayed_work
> > queue_delayed_work_on
> > therm_throt_process
> > intel_thermal_interrupt
> > ...
> >
> > When one CPU is up, the irq is enabled prior to CPU UP
> > notification which will then initialize therm_worker.
>
> You mean the unmasking of the thermal vector at the end of
> intel_init_thermal()?
Exactly, and there is one local CPU irq enable later too.
>
> If so, why don't you move that to the end of the notifier and unmask it
> only after all the necessary work like setting up the workqueues etc, is
> done, and save yourself adding yet another silly bool?
>
Thanks for your suggestion, I am just worried about the interrupt delay.
I traced there is about 2s gap between unmask interrupt and workqueue
Initialization. If you think it is OK to ignore this delay, I will make another
simple patch as you suggested😊
Best Regards
Chuansheng
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-06 9:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-01-06 6:41 Chuansheng Liu
2020-01-06 7:07 ` Borislav Petkov
2020-01-06 7:11 ` Ingo Molnar
2020-01-06 9:24 ` Liu, Chuansheng
2020-01-11 4:20 ` Liu, Chuansheng
2020-01-06 9:22 ` Liu, Chuansheng [this message]
2020-01-06 10:01 ` Boris Petkov
2020-01-06 10:10 ` Liu, Chuansheng
2020-01-06 10:37 ` Boris Petkov
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=27240C0AC20F114CBF8149A2696CBE4A615FC2FF@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com \
--to=chuansheng.liu@intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®