Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 16 Apr 2010 18:24:19 +0200 | From | Frederic Weisbecker <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] [watchdog] combine nmi_watchdog and softlockup |
| |
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 12:14:01PM -0400, Don Zickus wrote: > On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 05:32:12PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > > I'll try to implement this. Any objections if I combined hardlockup and > > > softlockup with per cpu watchdog_warn and have bit masks for HARDLOCKUP > > > and SOFTLOCKUP? I hate to just waste per cpu space for this. > > > > > > > > Hmm, a hardlockup can come in after a softlockup. > > Let me re-explain what I meant. It was meant to do double duty. The > softlockup code only checks the SOFTLOCKUP bit and the hardlockup only > ever checks the HARDLOCKUP bit. > > ie if get_cpu_var(watchdog_warn) && HARDLOCKUP { return; }
Ah right.
> > > Don't worry too much about memory: usually the more you have cpu, > > the more you have memory :) > > Plus this is debugging code, not something supposed to be enabled > > in production. > > Well depends on your POV. In RHEL we enable both NMI_WATCHDOG and > SOFTLOCKUP on production systems (and we have customers that are > thankful for that :-) ).
Ok :)
| |