Re: [PATCH] perf, x86: catch spurious interrupts after disablingcounters

[Robert Richter]

On 17.09.10 09:06:09, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> Robert.
> 
> Does it mean that with this patch, we don't need Don's back-to-back NMI patch
> anymore?

No, both fix separate things.

Don's patch is about this problem on Intel systems, where ack'ing the
status late may cause empty nmis:

 http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/8/25/124

My patch fixes a problem that after disabling a counter, it could
still cause a late NMI. It was observed on AMD systems, but may also
be valid for Intel systems.

-Robert

-- 
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Operating System Research Center

--
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/