Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 27 Mar 2007 09:37:53 -0700 | From | Jeremy Fitzhardinge <> | Subject | Re: [patch 1/2] Ignore stolen time in the softlockup watchdog |
| |
Prarit Bhargava wrote: > I'd like to see this patch implement/fix touch_cpu_softlockup_watchdog > and touch_softlockup_watchdog to mimic touch_nmi_watchdog's behaviour.
Why? Is that more correct? It seems to me that you're interested in whether a specific CPU has gone and locked up. If touching the watchdog makes it update all CPU timestamps, then you'll hide the fact that other CPUs have locked up, won't it?
J - 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/
| |