Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 02 Aug 2018 08:35:02 +0100 | From | Marc Zyngier <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/4] genirq: Provide basic NMI management for interrupt lines |
| |
On Thu, 02 Aug 2018 07:55:49 +0100, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote: > > On Thu, 2 Aug 2018, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > > > If we need to distinguish between the two, then we need two flags. One > > that indicates the generation capability, and one that indicates the > > forwarding capability. > > There is absolutely no reason to expose this on x86, really. > > Why? > > Because NMI is an utter trainwreck on x86. It's a single entry point > without the ability of differentiation from which source the NMI > originated. So mapping it to anything generic is just not going to work. > > It has absolutely nothing to do with the normal way of vector based > interrupt operation and I don't see at all how adding this just because > would improve anything on x86. In fact it would create more problems than > it solves.
Fair enough. Does it mean Julien can completely ignore the x86 requirements for this and focus on something that fit the need of architectures where (pseudo-)NMIs can be managed similarly to normal interrupts (arm, arm64, sparc...)?
Thanks,
M.
-- Jazz is not dead, it just smell funny.
| |