From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964898AbXBOEQi (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Feb 2007 23:16:38 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932629AbXBOEQi (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Feb 2007 23:16:38 -0500 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.24]:33748 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932618AbXBOEQh (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Feb 2007 23:16:37 -0500 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 20:16:32 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Paul Mackerras Cc: minyard@acm.org, Linux Kernel Subject: Re: [patch 4/4] ipmi: add new IPMI nmi watchdog handling Message-Id: <20070214201632.a7f18794.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <17875.56356.396676.239952@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> References: <20070214201257.GD5364@localdomain> <20070214195718.e78458cf.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <17875.56356.396676.239952@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.7 (GTK+ 2.8.17; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 15:05:56 +1100 Paul Mackerras wrote: > Andrew Morton writes: > > > This is all fairly unpleasant. > > > > What architecture is preventing us from using DIE_NMI_POST on all > > architectures which support ipmi? ia64? > > > > It would be better to simply require that all ipmi-using architectures > > implement notify_die(DIE_NMI_POST, ...). > > We're starting to see IPMI creeping on powerpc as well, and we don't > have an NMI. > Sure, but you could implement the registration function. I mean, you _would_ call the NMI callback if you could, right ;) As it stands, this change is pretty gruesome...