[lkml]   [2005]   [Oct]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: i386 nmi_watchdog: Merge check_nmi_watchdog fixes from x86_64
Bill Davidsen <> writes:

> Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> The per cpu nmi watchdog timer is based on an event counter. idle cpus don't
>> generate events so the NMI watchdog doesn't fire
>> and the test to see if the watchdog is working fails.
> Question: given all the concern about reducing clocks and all, do we actually
> need nmi on more than one CPU? Are there cases where a single CPU hangs in idle
> on an SMP system?

I really don't know, but the normal interrupt rate is once per second or slower
if the cpu is idle. I was just working in the vicinity and discovered when
I enabled the nmi watchdog it failed to come on because it didn't handled it's
initialization test properly, and x86_64 had already fixed it.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-10-05 22:05    [W:0.063 / U:10.976 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site