Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:8c0a:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id go10csp3238062pxb; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 10:21:51 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxH7R+3k3MMn/cHJ1rFBkL6yMClBGQOOnEewtQqEsxQEVfgLfvVS0YBw8v7pvEzk/rnGqDD X-Received: by 2002:aa7:ca55:: with SMTP id j21mr1552881edt.172.1611598911600; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 10:21:51 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1611598911; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=d0hO6CHsFARnwwiKaydyLbmlpgOBOywI9IvgP8ohPAFh+zCTvpPar04Om2j/lQDXqT CxoI3wAnERgqMDpAu/RwWU425RxjHX5/ZZJpzASsUNO5oFJCvydSjMf1VSO7FNV1KcsM XDwmkcCOT+io7gbFCDk0ngAAxXzYccSsbIEunAHIDhCE+kPPbb7wIF0umObBSbbktHD9 9m5UWUuSAYXrKEhPhHAbuNb/utJPqyTU2SXisRLKE0OwT6cDTydvaQEQtJLz3339uCnh Qe/D2aRYXcdDVINCwQMRiBQ0bBN7VcxEnswdiuNYUJoT0XMCNkWka0NH5pr5JYwq9BPF kAxQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :references:in-reply-to:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=Oa8bw9/cTgjt0n62074kT+TT+/ZNc33f2soO7d0DWaI=; b=MOzsM3Y+b8I7+CNOAdlUKEni+sZVCO/nJxDyE1npGqAc/MtIu8TlA0uOoiLTZPjyjt KgVLITxB/MaH7QDHfi97d78db/jwFM2zNfyXNouuF/X/ZFP4o4SqUxwjnQ1jwgHO4qM4 wT1r6MU0FkeG+ya+VjwB9cipCQzW5MUdUcwhI6EFTvQEfRzC0ty7sfzOu4z5wRJhpe6x Fc36togy8MKgnxMhQBGlkowV055YXwggXJwtUBwnB+qTIi/csNNM3RPd+22y+7LcX0q7 9qrx2JLPlYFXluYtVcrin6oQq8N3z2gs43Z/AzmjqlQdpj0VYXaNhdehACcGxWobQrN5 FZxg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id i13si7464426edl.347.2021.01.25.10.21.20; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 10:21:51 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726124AbhAYSRo (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 25 Jan 2021 13:17:44 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:50358 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730969AbhAYSRJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Jan 2021 13:17:09 -0500 Received: from gandalf.local.home (cpe-66-24-58-225.stny.res.rr.com [66.24.58.225]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 83D2E22583; Mon, 25 Jan 2021 18:16:25 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2021 13:16:24 -0500 From: Steven Rostedt To: Andy Lutomirski Cc: Lai Jiangshan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra , Lai Jiangshan , Andy Lutomirski , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] x86/entry/64: De-Xen-ify our NMI code further Message-ID: <20210125131624.612be16b@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <4415FFC4-995A-4C77-9A96-744ED697AF05@amacapital.net> References: <20210125123859.39b244ca@gandalf.local.home> <4415FFC4-995A-4C77-9A96-744ED697AF05@amacapital.net> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.8 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 25 Jan 2021 09:51:45 -0800 Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > The problem I see with this is that exc_nmi is called with the thread > > stack, if it were to take an exception, NMIs would be enabled allowing for > > a nested NMI to run. From what I can tell, I don't see anything stopping > > that NMI from executing over the currently running NMI. That is, this means > > that NMI handlers are now re-entrant. > > That was intentional in my part. The C code checks for this condition and handles it, just like it does on 32-bit kernels. I vaguely remember you implementing this, and me reviewing it. I'm getting to that age that there's less and less I remember doing :-/ I'll include a comment about that in my rewrite. But first, I'll re-review your changes to make sure there's no one offs that happen with the mixture of nmi stack handling and the x86_32 version doing the same thing. Thanks for the reminder. -- Steve