Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 09 Apr 2013 11:25:16 +0200 | From | Steffen Persvold <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] x86, amd, mce: Prevent potential cpu-online oops |
| |
On 4/4/2013 9:07 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 08:05:46PM +0200, Steffen Persvold wrote: >> It made more sense (to me) to skip the creation of MC4 all together >> if you can't find the matching northbridge since you can't reliably >> do the dec_and_test() reference counting on the shared bank when you >> don't have the common NB struct for all the shared cores. >> >> Or am I just smoking the wrong stuff ? > > No, actually *this* explanation should've been in the commit message. > You numascale people do crazy things with the hardware :) so explaining > yourself more verbosely is an absolute must if anyone is to understand > why you're changing the code. >
Boris,
A question came up. Why have this "shared" bank concept for the kobjects at all ? What's the advantage ? Before our patch, when running on our architecture but without pci domains for "slave" servers, everything was working fine except the de-allocation oops due to the NULL pointer when offlining cores.
Why not let all cores just create their individual kobject and skip this "shared" nb->bank4 concept ? Any disadvantage to that (apart from the obvious storage bloat?).
Cheers, Steffen
| |