Michael Ellerman writes:
> Nathan Lynch writes:
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> Michael Ellerman writes:
>>> Nathan Lynch writes:
When smp_send_safe_nmi_ipi() indicates that the target CPU has
responded to the IPI, skip the remote paca inspection
fallback. Otherwise both the sending and tar
Nathan Lynch writes:
> Hi Michael,
>
> Michael Ellerman writes:
>> Nathan Lynch writes:
>>> When smp_send_safe_nmi_ipi() indicates that the target CPU has
>>> responded to the IPI, skip the remote paca inspection
>>> fallback. Otherwise both the sending and target CPUs attempt the
>>> backtrace,
Hi Michael,
Michael Ellerman writes:
> Nathan Lynch writes:
>> When smp_send_safe_nmi_ipi() indicates that the target CPU has
>> responded to the IPI, skip the remote paca inspection
>> fallback. Otherwise both the sending and target CPUs attempt the
>> backtrace, usually creating a misleading (
Nathan Lynch writes:
> When smp_send_safe_nmi_ipi() indicates that the target CPU has
> responded to the IPI, skip the remote paca inspection
> fallback. Otherwise both the sending and target CPUs attempt the
> backtrace, usually creating a misleading ("didn't respond to backtrace
> IPI" is wrong)
When smp_send_safe_nmi_ipi() indicates that the target CPU has
responded to the IPI, skip the remote paca inspection
fallback. Otherwise both the sending and target CPUs attempt the
backtrace, usually creating a misleading ("didn't respond to backtrace
IPI" is wrong) and interleaved mess:
[ 1658.9
