From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Philippe Gerum In-Reply-To: <4E022367.7020200@domain.hid> References: <1305813493.2118.112.camel@domain.hid> <4DD55E3E.2030203@domain.hid> <4DD5633C.6050708@domain.hid> <1305836984.2118.125.camel@domain.hid> <4E022367.7020200@domain.hid> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 22:47:45 +0200 Message-ID: <1308775665.2159.98.camel@domain.hid> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Xenomai-core] [RFC] Getting rid of the NMI latency watchdog List-Id: Xenomai life and development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Gilles Chanteperdrix Cc: Jan Kiszka , xenomai@xenomai.org On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 19:16 +0200, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: > On 05/19/2011 10:29 PM, Philippe Gerum wrote: > > On Thu, 2011-05-19 at 20:36 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >> On 2011-05-19 20:15, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: > >>> On 05/19/2011 03:58 PM, Philippe Gerum wrote: > >>>> For this reason, I'm considering issuing a patch for a complete removal > >>>> of the NMI latency watchdog code in Xenomai 2.6.x, disabling the feature > >>>> for 2.6.38 kernels and above in 2.5.x. > >>>> > >>>> Comments welcome. > >>> > >>> I am in the same case as you: I no longer use Xeno's NMI watchdog, so I > >>> agree to get rid of it. > >> > >> Yeah. The last time we wanted to use it get more information about a > >> hard hang, the CPU we used was not supported. > >> > >> Philippe, did you test the Linux watchdog already, if it generate proper > >> results on artificial Xenomai lockups on a single core? > > > > This works provided we tell the pipeline to enter printk-sync mode when > > the watchdog kicks. So I'd say that we could probably do a better job in > > making the pipeline core smarter wrt NMI watchdog context handling than > > asking Xenomai to dup the mainline code for having its own NMI handling. > > If nobody disagrees, I am removing this code from -head. Now. > Ack. -- Philippe.