Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 16 Apr 2010 16:46:17 +0200 | From | Frederic Weisbecker <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] [watchdog] combine nmi_watchdog and softlockup |
| |
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 06:32:32PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: > On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 03:47:14AM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > [...] > > > + > > > +/* Callback function for perf event subsystem */ > > > +void watchdog_overflow_callback(struct perf_event *event, int nmi, > > > + struct perf_sample_data *data, > > > + struct pt_regs *regs) > > > +{ > > > + int this_cpu = smp_processor_id(); > > > + unsigned long touch_ts = per_cpu(watchdog_touch_ts, this_cpu); > > > + > > > + if (touch_ts == 0) { > > > + __touch_watchdog(); > > > + return; > > > + } > > > + > > > + /* check for a hardlockup > > > + * This is done by making sure our timer interrupt > > > + * is incrementing. The timer interrupt should have > > > + * fired multiple times before we overflow'd. If it hasn't > > > + * then this is a good indication the cpu is stuck > > > + */ > > > + if (is_hardlockup(this_cpu)) { > > > + /* only print hardlockups once */ > > > + if (cpumask_test_cpu(this_cpu, to_cpumask(hardlockup_mask))) > > > + return; > > > + > > > + if (hardlockup_panic) > > > + panic("Watchdog detected hard LOCKUP on cpu %d", this_cpu); > > > + else > > > + WARN(1, "Watchdog detected hard LOCKUP on cpu %d", this_cpu); > > > + > > > + cpumask_set_cpu(this_cpu, to_cpumask(hardlockup_mask)); > > > > > > > > May be have an arch spin lock there to update your cpu mask safely. > > > > Hmm, this is NMI handler path so from what we protect this per-cpu data? > Do I miss something? /me confused
The cpu mask is not per cpu here, this is a shared bitmap, so you can race against other cpus NMIs.
That said, as I suggested, having a per cpu var that we set when we warned would be much better than a spinlock here.
| |