lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Dec]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] watchdog: Softlockup has regular windows where it is not armed

Hi Don,

> > There might be a reason for this two stage sync but I haven't been
> > able to find it yet. Perhaps the unsynced versions of cpu_clock()
> > and sched_clock_tick() are not safe to call from all contexts?
>
> According to commit 8c2238eaaf0f774ca0f8d9daad7a616429bbb7f1 that was
> the case, cpu_clock wasn't NMI-safe. Now it is, thanks to Peter.

Thanks, that makes sense now.

> I have a couple of concerns about the patch. I am wondering about the
> overhead of getting the timestamp more often now as opposed to just
> setting a boolean for later. It makes sense to stamp it at the time
> of the call, don't know what the cost is.

I had a similar concern since we do execute this quite a lot. The
overhead of cpu_clock is quite low on powerpc, but not sure about the
other architectures.

> I am also concern about how this affects suspend/resume and kgdb. I
> cc'd Jason above for kgdb. I'll have to run some tests locally to
> see what long periods of delay look like. Oh and virt guests too.
> You don't have any test results from that setup do you?

I haven't tested suspend resume, kgdb or virtual guests yet.

Anton


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-12-05 11:31    [W:0.067 / U:0.484 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site