Hi Catalin, On 04/12/2018 18:09, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 11:57:12AM +0000, Julien Thierry wrote: >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c >> index 5f4d9ac..66344cd 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/traps.c >> @@ -897,13 +897,17 @@ bool arm64_is_fatal_ras_serror(struct pt_regs *regs, >> unsigned int esr) >> >> asmlinkage void do_serror(struct pt_regs *regs, unsigned int esr) >> { >> - nmi_enter(); >> + const bool was_in_nmi = in_nmi(); >> + >> + if (!was_in_nmi) >> + nmi_enter(); >> >> /* non-RAS errors are not containable */ >> if (!arm64_is_ras_serror(esr) || arm64_is_fatal_ras_serror(regs, esr)) >> arm64_serror_panic(regs, esr); >> >> - nmi_exit(); >> + if (!was_in_nmi) >> + nmi_exit(); >> } > > Do we actually need nmi_enter/exit in the outer do_serror() function? > Could we just move it to arm64_serror_panic()?
They might need to be here in the future: if we support kernel-first we would have extra calls in here that need to be in_nmi(), the same if we call out to APEI to support APCI's NOTIFY_SEI. Thanks, James