On Wed, 6 Jul 2016 13:55:01 -0500
minyard@xxxxxxx wrote:
> From: Corey Minyard <cminyard@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> On some x86 systems an MCE interrupt would come in before the kernel
> was ready for it. Looking at the latest RT code, it has similar
> (but not quite the same) code, except it adds a bool that tells if
> MCE handling is initialized. That was required because they had
> switched to use swork instead of a kernel thread. Here, just
> checking to see if the thread is NULL is good enough to see if
> MCE handling is initialized.
>
> Signed-off-by: Corey Minyard <cminyard@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c
> index aaf4b9b..cc70d98 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c
> @@ -1391,7 +1391,8 @@ static int mce_notify_work_init(void)
>
> static void mce_notify_work(void)
> {
> - wake_up_process(mce_notify_helper);
> + if (mce_notify_helper)
> + wake_up_process(mce_notify_helper);
> }
> #else
> static void mce_notify_work(void)
Wait, is this all that's needed?
Also, Boris should be credited here somewhere.
-- Steve
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
