On Monday 06 October 2008 17:02, Andi Kleen wrote: > On Sat, Oct 04, 2008 at 07:32:54PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report > > of recent regressions. > > > > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions > > from 2.6.26. Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know > > (either way). > > > > > > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11569 > > Subject : Don't complain about disabled irqs when the system has paniced > > Submitter : Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Date : 2008-09-02 13:49 (33 days old) > > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=122036356127282&w=4 > > The problem is actually worse than this description suggests. I updated > the bugzilla entry now. > > The new smp_call_function() that is called from panic is quite unsuitable > for this task: > - It allocates memory (not a good idea in panic0 > - It complains about interrupt off > - This whole thing breaks at least machine checks Why doesn't it use something like nmi_shootdown_cpus on panic rather than the (I guess less reliable and longer latency) smp_send_stop? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-testers" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
