From: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>
To: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>,
huang ying <huang.ying.caritas@gmail.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
Robert Richter <robert.richter@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] x86, NMI, Treat unknown NMI as hardware error
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2011 09:34:44 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DF56934.9000705@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110609120928.GR8162@redhat.com>
On 06/09/2011 08:09 PM, Don Zickus wrote:
> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 04:13:25PM +0800, Huang Ying wrote:
>> Hi, Don,
>>
>> On 05/18/2011 03:07 AM, Don Zickus wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 11:18:59AM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
>>>>> Random thought, in the Firmware first mode of HEST (which is the only way
>>>>> GHES records get produced??), does an SCI happen first to jump into the
>>>>> firmware for processing, then an NMI?
>>>>
>>>> Either that or there is a separate service processor which handles it.
>>>> Presumably it depends a lot on the particular system.
>>>
>>> Ah interesting. I was going to suggest somehow setting a bit when an SCI
>>> comes in and check that bit in the unknown NMI path as a possible hint
>>> that the NMI might be related to HEST (sorta how we flag unknown NMIs in
>>> the perf code).
>>>
>>> It was just an idea. Obviously a service processor will make that more
>>> difficult. :-)
>>
>> Hmm, what's the conclusion? Do you think unknown NMI should be seen as
>> hardware error? At least on some white listed machines?
>
> I still sorta have the opinion that a hardware error should be able be
> recognizable either through a GHES record or a bit in the southbridge.
> Whereas an unknown NMI is something lost and has no owner as the result of
> either a buggy NMI handler or an unimplemented NMI handler.
>
> Yeah, I can see hardware errors coming in through an unknown NMI but to me
> (from what I am reading about with APEI/GHES) is those should be trapped
> by the firmware and if they aren't then the firmware is broken. In those
> cases it should be up to the OEM to provide proper firmware (even certify
> them) to allow the proper experience, which includes being properly
> trapped by an NMI handler.
>
> Perhaps I am a bit naive in my belief but I am a little nervous panicing
> all the time on unknown NMIs when we are still chasing missed perf NMIs on
> a loaded box.
I think things SHOULD go this way too. This just is not the reality.
Best Regards,
Huang Ying
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-13 1:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-13 8:23 Huang Ying
2011-05-13 12:45 ` Don Zickus
2011-05-13 13:00 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-13 13:24 ` huang ying
2011-05-13 15:20 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-13 16:00 ` Don Zickus
2011-05-16 11:29 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-16 19:19 ` Don Zickus
2011-05-17 8:50 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-17 7:41 ` Huang Ying
2011-05-17 8:53 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-19 6:44 ` Huang Ying
2011-05-20 11:58 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-14 0:56 ` huang ying
2011-05-13 13:17 ` huang ying
2011-05-13 13:51 ` Don Zickus
2011-05-14 0:20 ` huang ying
2011-05-14 4:11 ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-13 15:17 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2011-05-14 0:26 ` huang ying
2011-05-14 7:51 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2011-05-15 0:06 ` huang ying
2011-05-15 6:34 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2011-05-16 1:09 ` Huang Ying
2011-05-16 19:03 ` Don Zickus
2011-05-16 19:53 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2011-05-17 5:39 ` Huang Ying
2011-05-17 14:24 ` Don Zickus
2011-05-17 16:38 ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-17 17:57 ` Don Zickus
2011-05-17 18:18 ` Andi Kleen
2011-05-17 19:07 ` Don Zickus
2011-05-20 8:13 ` Huang Ying
2011-06-09 12:09 ` Don Zickus
2011-06-09 15:22 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2011-06-13 1:34 ` Huang Ying [this message]
2011-05-16 19:44 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2011-05-17 7:32 ` Huang Ying
2011-05-14 0:47 ` huang ying
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=4DF56934.9000705@intel.com \
--to=ying.huang@intel.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=dzickus@redhat.com \
--cc=gorcunov@gmail.com \
--cc=huang.ying.caritas@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=robert.richter@amd.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
Powered by JetHome