Re: [PATCH 2/3] watchdog: control hard lockup detection default

From: Don Zickus
Date: Wed Jul 30 2014 - 13:07:53 EST

On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 04:16:38PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 30/07/2014 15:43, Don Zickus ha scritto:
> >> > Nice catch. Looks like this will need a v2. Paolo, do we have a
> >> > consensus on the proc echoing? Or should that be revisited in the v2 as
> >> > well?
> > As discussed privately, how about something like this to handle that case:
> > (applied on top of these patches)
> Don, what do you think about proc?
> My opinion is still what I mentioned earlier in the thread, i.e. that if
> the file says "1", writing "0" and then "1" should not constitute a
> change WRT to the initial state.

I can agree. The problem is there are two things this proc value
controls, softlockup and hardlockup. I have always tried to keep the both
disabled or enabled together.

This patchset tries to separate them for an edge case. Hence the proc
value becomes slightly confusing.

I don't know the right way to solve this without introducing more proc

We have /proc/sys/kernel/nmi_watchdog and /proc/sys/kernel/watchdog which
point to the same internal variable. Do I separate them and have
'nmi_watchdog' just mean hardlockup and 'watchdog' mean softlockup? Then
we can be clear on what the output is. Or does 'watchdog' represent a
superset of 'nmi_watchdog' && softlockup?

That is where the confusion lies.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at