>> However, I'd like to be very sure this thing doesn't introduce any >> regressions to the MCA code. So even if Tony's testing passes, I'd like >> to be very conservative here and stress it more than usual. Because once >> this thing hits upstream and stuff starts breaking, it'll be a serious >> PITA reverting it.
The test I left running on Friday was just running the stack-switch asm patch, without any mce.c changes. It died at 16000 iterations with the mce synchronization issue. This morning I started a new test with all the mce changes (no TIF_MCE_NOTIFY, just process the recovery in the tail of do_machine_check(). It just passed the 18000 point, and it still going. In addition I've been throwing the odd "make -j144" kernel build at the machine so we check out the non-idle paths too. -Tony
