On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 12:48:48PM -0400, Don Zickus wrote: > On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 12:38:46PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 03:25:48PM -0400, Don Zickus wrote: > > > Now that we have setup an NMI subtye called NMI_EXT, there is really > > > no need to hard code the default external NMI handler in the main > > > nmi handler routine. > > > > > > Move it to a proper function and register it on boot. This change is > > > just code movement. > > > > > > In addition, update the hpwdt to allow it to unregister the default > > > handler on its registration (and vice versa). This allows the driver > > > to take control of that io port (which it ultimately wanted to do > > > originally), but in a cleaner way. > > > > wanting that is one thing, but is it also a sane thing? You don't do > > thing just because drivers want it. > > Heh. I understand. > > Today, I have hacked up the SERR and IOCHK handlers to give hpwdt the > chance to do its 'magic' bios call to collect information before > panic'ing. > > I was trying to clean things up by removing those hacks, but I guess I can > see your point, there is no guarantee they handle the hardware correctly. > :-/
So while I'll leave the decision to the x86 people, I find the changelog entirely devoid of a good reason to do this. An in my personal opinion any hardware that triggers non detectable NMIs is just plain broken. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
