Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 17:57:44 +0100
From: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
To: Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org>
Cc: kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com>, kbuild-all@01.org,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>,
        Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        adi-buildroot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-cris-kernel@axis.com,
        linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
        linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org,
        sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
        Koichi Yasutake <yasutake.koichi@jp.panasonic.com>,
        linux-am33-list@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] printk/nmi: Generic solution for safe printk in
 NMI
Message-ID: <20151204165744.GD20935@pathway.suse.cz>
References: <1448622572-16900-2-git-send-email-pmladek@suse.com>
 <201511271919.aEZuZKNe%fengguang.wu@intel.com>
 <20151127153804.GC2648@pathway.suse.cz>
 <alpine.LNX.2.00.1512020022460.32500@pobox.suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1512020022460.32500@pobox.suse.cz>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1282
Lines: 30

On Wed 2015-12-02 00:24:49, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Nov 2015, Petr Mladek wrote:
> 
> > MN10300 has its own implementation for entering and exiting NMI 
> > handlers. It does not call nmi_enter() and nmi_exit(). Please, find 
> > below an updated patch that adds printk_nmi_enter() and 
> > printk_nmi_exit() to the custom entry points. Then we could add HAVE_NMI 
> > to arch/mn10300/Kconfig and avoid the above warning.
> 
> Hmm, so what exactly would go wrong if MN10300 (whatever that architecture 
> is) would call nmi_enter() and nmi_exit() at the places where it's 
> starting and finishing NMI handler?
> 
> >From a cursory look, it seems like most (if not all) of the things called 
> from nmi_{enter,exit}() would be nops there anyway.

Good point. Max mentioned in the other main that the NMI handler
should follow the NMI ruler. I do not why it could not work.
In fact, it might improve things, e.g. nmi_enter() blocks
recursive NMIs.

I think that it will move it into a separate patch, thought.

Best Regards,
Petr
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/