From: Jan-Benedict Glaw <jbglaw@lug-owl.de>
To: parisc-linux@parisc-linux.org
Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] Watchdog on parisc?
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 10:42:35 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030216094234.GG351@lug-owl.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030216083110.GC18888@dsl2.external.hp.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2319 bytes --]
On Sun, 2003-02-16 01:31:10 -0700, Grant Grundler <grundler@dsl2.external.hp.com>
wrote in message <20030216083110.GC18888@dsl2.external.hp.com>:
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 07:11:24PM +0100, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > I'm currently playing a bit with my B132L and 715. They're working quite
> > nice, except that kernels aren't too stable (gcc-3.2, I'll do some more
> > test compiles with gcc-3.0, too).
>
> gcc-3.2.1 has a few bugs that have bitten us already (search mail
> archive on "pty.c"). I'm not sure if it's better to stick with
> gcc 3.0 or grab something that's bleeding edge (gcc 3.3.x).
Yeah, I know. I followed that thread. gcc-3.0 seems to produce a more
stable kernel, but even there are some gotchas (eg. strace'ing programs
often leads to stuck userland while I still can ping the box or complete
the three-way-handshake of a starting TCP connection...).
I'd possibly spend some time in invensting this...
> > I've looked through the docs available if a watchdog is mentioned. In
> > ./docs/platforms/b1xx-service.pdf there's a watchdog timeout error
> > declared (during selftest) so I *think* there is a watchdog, isn't
> > there?
>
> I'm not sure what this is refering to. The CPU has some HW checking
> that is a sort of watchdog but it's CPU internal and only the firmware
> touches those.
So there's nothing what's like a watchdog as you know it from some
machines (SGI Indys for example) or as add-on cards in machines (PCI/ISA
cards).
> > I've not yet seen a driver for it, nor have I seen any
> > documentation. Is there a watchdog (and possibly some docu or an hpux
> > vmunix to disassemble) so I could possibly write something better than
> > softdog.c?
>
> not if it's what I'm thinking of (transaction timeout, ie causes an
> HPMC). This is a built-in HW feature.
Hmmm... Triggering a HPMC would be a neat feature. So we could think
about a way to initiate something that, if not handled, would trigger a
HPMC some 60 seconds later:-?
MfG, JBG
--
Jan-Benedict Glaw jbglaw@lug-owl.de . +49-172-7608481
"Eine Freie Meinung in einem Freien Kopf | Gegen Zensur
fuer einen Freien Staat voll Freier Bürger" | im Internet!
Shell Script APT-Proxy: http://lug-owl.de/~jbglaw/software/ap2/
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-02-16 9:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-02-14 18:11 [parisc-linux] Watchdog on parisc? Jan-Benedict Glaw
2003-02-16 8:31 ` Grant Grundler
2003-02-16 9:42 ` Jan-Benedict Glaw [this message]
2003-02-17 5:11 ` Grant Grundler
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20030216094234.GG351@lug-owl.de \
--to=jbglaw@lug-owl.de \
--cc=parisc-linux@parisc-linux.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.