lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Mar]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-03-28 16:17    [W:0.075 / U:0.356 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site