Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1204256
| From | "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@intel.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | RE: [BUG]: Intel uncore boot warning introduced in 4.1 |
| Date | 2015-08-10 15:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <pVVjl-7A8-21@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <pUqUi-6vT-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <pUw3E-5JN-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <pUxVM-8tG-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <pULP5-3mH-19@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
> On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 06:10:40PM +0000, Liang, Kan wrote: > > The issue may be caused by uncore box initialization. > > > > For preventing the potential issues of uncore box initialization, I > > once moved the uncore_box_init() out of driver initialization in > > commit c05199e5a57a579fea1e8fa65e2b511ceb524ffc. > > > > However, it cause some desktop crash, because the box initialization > > codes were moved in IPI context. > > > > For fixing the crash issue, we had two choice at that time. > > - Simply revert the codes. That's where is > > 15c1247953e8a45232ed5a5540f291d2d0a77665 from. > > - Move uncore_box_init out of IPI context to uncore event > > init. I provided a patch for it. https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/4/28/21 > > Stephane Eranian also verified it on his platform > > > > At that time, we chose first option. But it looks there is some issue > > now. I guess we may try the second option this time. > > > > Matthew, > > > > Could you please revert > > 15c1247953e8a45232ed5a5540f291d2d0a77665 > > and apply the patch https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/4/26/294? > > See if it works? > > That patch is wrong though; how can even publish a PMU which is not > initialized? It's initialized but not in the driver initialization. We once encountered boot crashes which caused by uncore driver who trying to access non-existing boxes. Also this uncore boot warning. So I think it's better to move the box init code out of driver initialization to prevent such potential boot failures. Uncore event init should be a good place to do box init. Only when the box is not initialized and user tries to use uncore event, we do box initialization. Thanks, Kan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[BUG]: Intel uncore boot warning introduced in 4.1 Matthew Leach <matthew@mattleach.net> - 2015-08-06 12:50 +0200
Re: [BUG]: Intel uncore boot warning introduced in 4.1 Matthew Leach <matthew@mattleach.net> - 2015-08-06 18:20 +0200
RE: [BUG]: Intel uncore boot warning introduced in 4.1 "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@intel.com> - 2015-08-06 20:20 +0200
Re: [BUG]: Intel uncore boot warning introduced in 4.1 Matthew Leach <matthew@mattleach.net> - 2015-08-06 20:50 +0200
Re: [BUG]: Intel uncore boot warning introduced in 4.1 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2015-08-07 11:10 +0200
RE: [BUG]: Intel uncore boot warning introduced in 4.1 "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@intel.com> - 2015-08-10 15:30 +0200
csiph-web