lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Mar]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch 1/2] Ignore stolen time in the softlockup watchdog


Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>
> ---
> kernel/softlockup.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++---------
> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> ===================================================================
> --- a/kernel/softlockup.c
> +++ b/kernel/softlockup.c
> @@ -17,8 +17,8 @@
>
> static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(print_lock);
>
> -static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, touch_timestamp);
> -static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, print_timestamp);
> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long long, touch_timestamp);
> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long long, print_timestamp);
> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct task_struct *, watchdog_task);
>
> static int did_panic = 0;
> @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ static struct notifier_block panic_block
>
> void touch_softlockup_watchdog(void)
> {
> - __raw_get_cpu_var(touch_timestamp) = jiffies;
> + __raw_get_cpu_var(touch_timestamp) = sched_clock();
> }
>

I'd like to see this patch implement/fix touch_cpu_softlockup_watchdog
and touch_softlockup_watchdog to mimic touch_nmi_watchdog's behaviour.

See this now obsolete patch: http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/3/15/131

P.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-03-27 16:43    [W:0.095 / U:0.180 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site