Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 28 Mar 2007 10:13:04 -0400 | From | Prarit Bhargava <> | Subject | Re: [patch 3/4] Locally disable the softlockup watchdog rather than touching it |
| |
Andi Kleen wrote: > On Wednesday 28 March 2007 16:00, Prarit Bhargava wrote: > >>>> touch_nmi_watchdog is attempting to tickle _all_ CPUs softlockup watchdogs. >>>> >>>> >>> It is supposed to only touch the current CPU, just like it only touches >>> the NMI watchdog on the current CPU. >>> >>> >>> >> Andi, >> >> (sorry for the cut-and-paste). >> >> touch_nmi_watchdogs sets EACH CPUs alert_counter to 0. >> > > You're right. Sorry for the confusion. > > But just touching the current CPU would make much more sense. After all > the caller doesn't know anything about the state of other CPUs. Perhaps it would be best > to just change that and keep the softlockup semantics. > Yeah -- you're probably right, and besides that we're not seeing a crazy # of softlockup messages after touch_nmi_watchdogs calls.
My original comments regarding the code still stand though -- we shouldn't have multiple methods of playing with the softlockup watchdog.
P.
> -Andi > - 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/
| |