On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 02:02:53PM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-03-17 at 11:43 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > 
> > Is this one going to be be my fault too?
> 
> Looks like it isn't my fault. In ipi_cpu_crash_stop() we don't modify
> the online mask. Which is reasonable enough if we want to preserve its
> original contents from before the crash, but it does make that
> WARN_ON() in machine_kexec() a false positive.
> 
> Btw, why is this a normal IPI and not something... less maskable?
> On x86 we use NMI for that...

Architecturally, arm64 does not have an NMI.

There's been some work to try to get pseudo-NMIs using GICv3 priorities,
but that's about the closest we can get today.

Thanks,
Mark.

_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec

Reply via email to