On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 05:42:31AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > On June 19, 2025 5:32:26 AM EDT, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 05:07:10AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > >> 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. I would seriously consider dropping support for anything that can't do cmpxchg at the width you need.
