Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752140AbdLYJrw (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Dec 2017 04:47:52 -0500 Received: from mail-wm0-f41.google.com ([74.125.82.41]:34489 "EHLO mail-wm0-f41.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750807AbdLYJru (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Dec 2017 04:47:50 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBos6KL1tXAyPIdtzuY39OXquiNjUGznS+v0Guz1xOk6sFZwqvij00iNmO7PmwPYaaN2wByaPqw== Date: Mon, 25 Dec 2017 10:47:46 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Alexandru Chirvasitu Cc: Linus Torvalds , Thomas Gleixner , kernel list , Andy Lutomirski , Borislav Petkov , Brian Gerst , Denys Vlasenko , "H. Peter Anvin" , Josh Poimboeuf , Peter Zijlstra , Steven Rostedt Subject: Re: PROBLEM: consolidated IDT invalidation causes kexec to reboot Message-ID: <20171225094746.bcbmqqyjiaioo7lh@gmail.com> References: <20171224014415.GA5663@chirva-void> <20171224072832.GA959@chirva-void> <20171224112817.4itmll6ru5i45t7n@gmail.com> <20171224152715.GA1506@chirva-void> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20171224152715.GA1506@chirva-void> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1068 Lines: 32 * Alexandru Chirvasitu wrote: > The first attachment is the config I initially used last night after > that second patch (removing 'local' etc.). > > As you guessed, all four options are set, hence the name of the file > (ending in '-y'). The other config I'm attaching was treated as you > lay out (2-config-n). > > I used the '-n' config to compile two kernels just now: > > (a) e802a51, that same first commit giving me trouble. > > The changes made no difference to kexec behaviour: with the e802a51 > kernel calling kexec boot directly with -e and triggering a panic both > kick off a full reboot, though the crash kernel registers as loaded. > > (b) the kernel in the branch I made last night, with the set_idt kexec > (for good measure, I thought I might as well do this one too). > > No difference here either: the crash dump kernel boots fine both ways > (directly and upon intentional crashing). Thanks for all the info! Detailed analysis from me (or Thomas) will have to wait after the Christmas hollidays. Thanks, Ingo