[lkml]   [2007]   [Mar]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH]: Fix bogus softlockup warning with sysrq-t
Prarit Bhargava wrote:
> There are some situations when soft lockup warnings are expected in the
> kernel. For example, when doing an alt-sysrq-t on a large number of processes,
> the dump to console can take a long time and the tasklist_lock is held over
> that period. This results in a bogus soft lockup warning.

Wouldn't it be better to just temporarily disable softlockups for the

> This patch reworks touch_softlockup_watchdog to touch ALL cpu's
> touch_timestamp. It also introduces touch_cpu_softlockup_watchdog to touch
> a single cpu's touch_timestamp.

Doesn't this mean that if one CPU gets locked up, it will be undetected
so long as some other CPU is making progress?

I have another pair of softlockup patches in which I try to address:

* ignoring time stolen by hypervisors
* threads going to sleep tickless for long periods of time

I could easy add a "global disable" function, which would allow long
sysrq messages, and it would help Thilo with his long flash update freezes.

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: 2007-03-27 07:45    [W:0.059 / U:9.796 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site