Re: new text patching for review

[Andi Kleen]

On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 06:15:46PM -0700, Zachary Amsden wrote:
> Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> >Yes, kprobes is case 1: atomic update. And we don't even have to bother
> >about Intel's erratum. This one is ok. That's mainly the
> >alternatives/paravirt code I worry about.
> >  
> 
> Paravirt and alternatives should all be ok because they are done before 
> SMP bringup and with NMIs disabled.  NMI watchdog is not setup until 
> smp_prepare_cpus/check_nmi_watchdog, which happens way later, not during 
> parse_args/setup_nmi_watchdog, which just decides which type of watchdog 
> to setup.

There could be other NMIs too - e.g. caused by IO devices or NMI
buttons - but they're relatively unlikely.

> 
> I originally considered the NMI problem for paravirt-ops patching done 
> during module load, and found that I would need to modify 
> stop_machine_run to have an architecture specific callout to mask and 
> unmask NMIs.

When your virtual machine never injects NMIs or MCEs you're ok.

-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/