Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755295AbdDLW3m (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Apr 2017 18:29:42 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:40407 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752256AbdDLW3k (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Apr 2017 18:29:40 -0400 Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2017 00:29:25 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov To: "Luck, Tony" Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Dan Williams , "Verma, Vishal L" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org" , "ross.zwisler@linux.intel.com" , "x86@kernel.org" Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] x86, mce: change the mce notifier to 'blocking' from 'atomic' Message-ID: <20170412222925.r3izasv3yuyjy62e@pd.tnic> References: <20170412195903.GA29506@omniknight.lm.intel.com> <20170412202238.5d327vmwjqvbzzop@pd.tnic> <1492028744.2738.14.camel@intel.com> <20170412205229.GA13659@intel.com> <20170412211931.GA15771@intel.com> <20170412214749.jyt7cmyhovivtb2m@pd.tnic> <20170412221639.5klmqk4mjbvy6btx@pd.tnic> <20170412222619.GA17839@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20170412222619.GA17839@intel.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 567 Lines: 16 On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 03:26:19PM -0700, Luck, Tony wrote: > We can futz with that and have them specify which chain (or both) > that they want to be added to. Well, I didn't want the atomic chain to be a notifier because we can keep it simple and non-blocking. Only the process context one will be. So the question is, do we even have a use case for outside consumers hanging on the atomic chain? Because if not, we're good to go. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) --