RE: [patch] 2.6.0 MCA TLB error recovery

From: Luck, Tony <tony.luck_at_intel.com>
Date: 2003-12-20 05:07:04
> >It looks like salinfo_log_wakeup() is called right before
> >ia64_log_print() ... so I'm not sure why the salinfo_decode
> >daemon kept on snoozing.  Keith: am I missing something obvious?
> 
> From the top of salinfo_log_wakeup()
> 
>  * ...  MCA and INIT events are
>  * not irq safe, do not call any routines that use spinlocks, 
> they may deadlock.

Okay ... that was pretty danged obvious!  Thanks for pointing
it out so gently :-)

> MCA and INIT records are noted but it is not safe to call up() from
> those interrupts, so the daemon cannot be woken.  This has not been a
> problem in the past because MCA and INIT were not recoverable, the
> records are picked up on the next boot.  Once my patches are 
> in David's
> tree, I will update salinfo to periodically check for any MCA or INIT
> records and kick the daemon.  There was no point before, I had no way
> of testing this case.

Sounds good.  Salinfo-0.4 is beautiful by the way.  Getting all the
bits decoded from processor state parameter and ipsr/xpsr etc. is great.

-Tony
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Received on Fri Dec 19 13:10:35 2003

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:21 EST