lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Apr]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [tip:core/locking] watchdog, hpwdt: Remove priority option for NMI callback
Date
Wim:


Don is correct. We did have a separate discussion about this after I denied the original patch. It is all good now.

And thanks for cutting in the port 0x72 patch.

Thanks,
Tom

-----Original Message-----
From: Don Zickus [mailto:dzickus@redhat.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 7:27 AM
To: Wim Van Sebroeck
Cc: mingo@kernel.org; hpa@zytor.com; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; torvalds@linux-foundation.org; peterz@infradead.org; Mingarelli, Thomas; akpm@linux-foundation.org; tglx@linutronix.de; linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:core/locking] watchdog, hpwdt: Remove priority option for NMI callback
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 09:13:39AM +0200, Wim Van Sebroeck wrote:
> >
> > Therefore hpwdt's priority mechanism doesn't make sense any
> > more. They will be always first on the NMI_UNKNOWN queue, if
> > they register.
> >
> > Removing this parameter cleans up the code and simplifies things
> > for the next patch which changes how nmis are registered.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
> > Cc: Thomas Mingarelli <thomas.mingarelli@hp.com>
> > Cc: Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@iguana.be>
> > Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> > Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
> > Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> > Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1333051877-15755-2-git-send-email-dzickus@redhat.com
> > Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
>
> This is the feedback I have from Tom which he discussed with Don:
> > I don't like this patch because the Virtual NMI button doesn't come through the pretimeout routine. It is taken by the
> system as an IOCK NMI error and no log messages in our IML.
> > Our BIOS is not able to source the NMI.
>
> And since then it became quiet. Imho: this needs more discussion...

Tom and I discussed this offline. The result was patch 2 of this series.
The problem he had, had nothing to do with this patch (which was just a
cleanup really). Tom tested the second patch and was happy with the
results.

If there is any other issues, I am assuming Tom would have let me know a
while ago. But I believe all his issues are addressed. Tom?

Cheers,
Don
--
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: 2012-04-26 15:53    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans