[lkml]   [2011]   [Nov]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Perhaps a side effect regarding NMI returns
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 12:58 PM, Steven Rostedt <> wrote:
> Note, the reason that I've been looking at this code, is because I'm
> looking at implementing your idea to handle irets in NMIs, caused by
> faults, exceptions, and the reason I really care about: debugging.
> Your proposal is here:

Ahh, good that you pointed to it, I'd completely forgotten about this one.

Yeah. Simplifying NMI and not mixing up the paranoid stuff sounds like
a good idea, and then if we do the nice NMI counting thing and avoid
the whole problem with NMI and iret, that would be a nice cleanup in

So if that patch I posted works for you (with some NMI-heavy workload
like non-PEBS tracing) I think it's the way to go.

Too late for 3.2 obviously, since I don't think anybody has actually
reported the "delayed NMI's" as a real problem - so even if it's a
bug, it's not a bug we should try to fix at this stage.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2011-11-29 22:07    [W:0.046 / U:10.404 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site