ia64, kdump: Mask INIT first in panic-kdump path
Summary: Asserting INIT might block kdump if the system is already going to start kdump via panic. Description: INIT can interrupt anywhere in panic path, so it can interrupt in middle of kdump kicked by panic. Therefore there is a race if kdump is kicked concurrently, via Panic and via INIT. INIT could fail to invoke kdump if the system is already going to start kdump via panic. It could not restart kdump from INIT handler if some of cpus are already playing dead with INIT masked. It also means that INIT could block kdump's progress if no monarch is entered in the INIT rendezvous. Panic+INIT is a rare, but possible situation since it can be assumed that the kernel or an internal agent decides to panic the unstable system while another external agent decides to send an INIT to the system at same time. How to reproduce: Assert INIT just after panic, before all other cpus have frozen Expected results: continue kdump invoked by panic, or restart kdump from INIT Actual results: might be hang, crashdump not retrieved Proposed Fix: This patch masks INIT first in panic path to take the initiative on kdump, and reuse atomic value kdump_in_progress to make sure there is only one initiator of kdump. All INITs asserted later should be used only for freezing all other cpus. This mask will be removed soon by rfi in relocate_kernel.S, before jump into kdump kernel, after all cpus are frozen and no-op INIT handler is registered. So if INIT was in the interval while it is masked, it will pend on the system and will received just after the rfi, and handled by the no-op handler. If there was a MCA event while psr.mc is 1, in theory the event will pend on the system and will received just after the rfi same as above. MCA handler is unregistered here at the time, so received MCA will not reach to OS_MCA and will result in warmboot by SAL. Note that codes in this masked interval are relatively simpler than that in MCA/INIT handler which also executed with the mask. So it can be said that probability of error in this interval is supposed not so higher than that in MCA/INIT handler. Signed-off-by: Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com> Cc: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> Cc: Haren Myneni <hbabu@us.ibm.com> Cc: kexec@lists.infradead.org Acked-by: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
Showing
Please register or sign in to comment