From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
David Bahi <dbahi@novell.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Gregory Haskins <GHaskins@novell.com>
Subject: Re: nmi_watchdog fix for x86_64 to be more like i386
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 23:41:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200710012341.53169.ak@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.0.9999.0710012207270.20478@localhost.localdomain>
> IRQ_NOBALANCING is not preventing cpu unplug. It moves the affinity to the
> next CPU, but the check in NMI watchdog for CPU == 0 would not longer
> work.
That cannot happen right now because cpu_disable() on both i386/x86-64
reject CPU #0. So just setting IRQ_NOBALANCING is sufficient and both
do that already. I was wrong earlier in being concerned about this.
> int tick_do_broadcast(cpumask_t mask)
> @@ -137,6 +147,7 @@ int tick_do_broadcast(cpumask_t mask)
> cpu_clear(cpu, mask);
> td = &per_cpu(tick_cpu_device, cpu);
> td->evtdev->event_handler(td->evtdev);
> + tick_broadcast_account(cpu);
That would not handle the case with a single CPU running only
irq 0 but not broadcasting I think.
I believe ftp://ftp.firstfloor.org/pub/ak/x86_64/quilt/patches/fix-watchdog
is the correct fix
-Andi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-10-01 21:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-09-26 18:03 nmi_watchdog fix for x86_64 to be more like i386 David Bahi
2007-10-01 17:36 ` Andi Kleen
2007-10-01 18:54 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-10-01 19:16 ` Andi Kleen
2007-10-01 19:27 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-10-01 19:56 ` Arjan van de Ven
2007-10-01 20:10 ` Dave Jones
2007-10-01 20:11 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-10-01 21:17 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-10-01 21:41 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2007-10-01 21:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-10-01 22:07 ` Andi Kleen
2007-10-01 22:47 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-10-01 22:52 ` Arjan van de Ven
2007-10-02 4:56 ` Mika Penttilä
2007-10-02 5:00 ` Arjan van de Ven
2007-10-02 5:51 ` Andi Kleen
2007-10-02 6:18 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-10-05 4:37 ` Pallipadi, Venkatesh
2007-10-05 20:37 ` Thomas Gleixner
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-10-05 16:01 David Bahi
2007-10-05 16:03 ` Andi Kleen
2007-10-05 17:38 ` Peter W. Morreale
2007-10-05 18:00 ` Andi Kleen
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=200710012341.53169.ak@suse.de \
--to=ak@suse.de \
--cc=GHaskins@novell.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=dbahi@novell.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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.