Thread (79 messages) 79 messages, 6 authors, 2025-06-24

Re: [PATCH v10 07/14] unwind_user/deferred: Make unwind deferral requests NMI-safe

From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Date: 2025-06-19 09:42:44
Also in: bpf, lkml


On June 19, 2025 5:32:26 AM EDT, Peter Zijlstra [off-list ref] wrote:
On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 05:07:10AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
quoted
Does #DB make in_nmi() true? If that's the case then we do need to handle that.
Yes: #DF, #MC, #BP (int3), #DB and NMI all have in_nmi() true.

Ignoring #DF because that's mostly game over, you can get them all
nested for up to 4 (you're well aware of the normal NMI recursion
crap).
We probably can implement this with stacked counters.
Then there is the SEV #VC stuff, which is also NMI like. So if you're a
CoCo-nut, you can perhaps get it up to 5.
The rest of the tracing infrastructure goes 4 deep and hasn't had issues, so 4 is probably sufficient.

-- Steve 
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help