Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 19 Oct 2006 09:18:16 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: 2.6.19-rc2-mm1 |
| |
On 19 Oct 2006 14:32:11 +0200 Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> wrote:
> Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> writes: > > > On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 16:01:05 -0700 > > Badari Pulavarty <pbadari@us.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > > > Is the NMI watchdog ticking over? > > > > > > I think so. > > > > > > # dmesg | grep NMI > > > ACPI: LAPIC_NMI (acpi_id[0x00] high edge lint[0x1]) > > > ACPI: LAPIC_NMI (acpi_id[0x01] high edge lint[0x1]) > > > ACPI: LAPIC_NMI (acpi_id[0x02] high edge lint[0x1]) > > > ACPI: LAPIC_NMI (acpi_id[0x03] high edge lint[0x1]) > > > testing NMI watchdog ... OK. > > > > > > What does it say in /proc/interrupts? > > > > The x86_64 nmi watchdog handling looks rather complex. > > > > <checks a couple of x86-64 machines> > > > > The /proc/interrutps NMI count seems to be going up by about > > one-per-minute. How odd. Maybe you just need to wait longer. > > That's consistent with a idle machine. The perfctr used by the nmi > watchdog only increases when the CPU isn't halted and when it's idle > it's not doing very much. When something actually loops it should > increase much faster though. >
ok..
What is the reason for not using an apic/lapic NMI source for the watchdog? - 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/
| |