Hi Keith! On Tue, 2006-07-11 at 14:55 +1000, Keith Owens wrote: > Fernando Luis =?ISO-8859-1?Q?V=E1zquez?= Cao (on Tue, 11 Jul 2006 13:21:01 > +0900) wrote: > >That is a good idea, but I have on concern. In mach-default by default > >we use __send_IPI_shortcut (no_broadcast==0) instead of send_IPI_mask. > >Is it always safe to ignore the no_broadcast setting? In other words, > >can __send_IPI_shortcut be replaced by send_IPI_mask safely? > > It is always safe to use send_IPI_mask. It is not used by default > because of concerns that send_IPI_mask may be slower than using a > broadcast, although I do not know if anybody has measurements to back > up that concern. OTOH I can guarantee that sending NMI as a broadcast > has problems, it breaks some Dell Xeon servers[1]. My fix was to never > broadcast NMI, from 2.6.18-rc1 NMI_VECTOR always uses a mask[2] and > crash was changed accordingly[3]. > > [1] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=114828920800003&r=1&w=2 > [2] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=115103727400006&r=1&w=2 > [3] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?t=115096703800003&r=1&w=2
Thank you for the links (I had forgotten about that thread) and comments! I prepared new patches and hopefully I got it right this time, Do they look good this time (PATCH 4/4 in particular)? Thank you in advance, Fernando _______________________________________________ fastboot mailing list [email protected] https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/fastboot
