Re: [PATCH 4/9] x86, NMI: Remove DIE_NMI_IPI and add priorties tohandlers

[Andi Kleen]

On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 09:41:28PM +0300, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 05:27:25PM -0500, Don Zickus wrote:
> > When re-ordering how the NMI handles its callbacks, a conversation started
> > asking what DIE_NMI_IPI meant.  No one could answer it.
> 
> It should have came from commit
> 
>  | commit c4b2bffee2a4115fed2825530f2b906ee2f17bd7
>  | Author: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>
>  | Date:   Fri Jan 23 18:46:40 2004 -0800
>  |
>  |   [PATCH] x86-64 merge
>  |   
>  |   Mainly lots of bug fixes and a few minor features. One change is that
>  |   it uses drivers/Kconfig now like i386. This requires a few minor changes in
>  |   outside Kconfig files which I am sending separately.
>  ...
> 
> Andi do you remember what the initial idea was? Didn't find any user of it
> even in this old commit. Just curious.

The original die names were pretty much a 1:1 conversion of the hooks
used by both the external KDB and KGDB patchkits floating around
at that time.

IIRC DIE_NMI_IPI was the one that was early in the NMI handler
and DIE_NMI late when everything else failed.

So you could use NMI_IPI when you just wanted to stop
all CPUs with a broadcast NMI and can check that reliable
through some memory location, and NMI when you wanted
to drop into the debugger as a last resort.


-Andi

-- 
ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Speaking for myself only.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/