Re: [PATCH v2] [watchdog] combine nmi_watchdog and softlockup

[Don Zickus]

On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 05:32:12PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > I'll try to implement this.  Any objections if I combined hardlockup and
> > softlockup with per cpu watchdog_warn and have bit masks for HARDLOCKUP
> > and SOFTLOCKUP?  I hate to just waste per cpu space for this.
> 
> 
> 
> Hmm, a hardlockup can come in after a softlockup.

Let me re-explain what I meant.  It was meant to do double duty.  The
softlockup code only checks the SOFTLOCKUP bit and the hardlockup only
ever checks the HARDLOCKUP bit.

ie if get_cpu_var(watchdog_warn) && HARDLOCKUP { return; }

> Don't worry too much about memory: usually the more you have cpu,
> the more you have memory :)
> Plus this is debugging code, not something supposed to be enabled
> in production.

Well depends on your POV.  In RHEL we enable both NMI_WATCHDOG and
SOFTLOCKUP on production systems (and we have customers that are
thankful for that :-) ).

Cheers,
Don
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/