From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>
To: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
peterz@infradead.org, fweisbec@gmail.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] [lockup detector] sync touch_*_watchdog back to old semantics
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2010 20:36:32 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100901163632.GA6506@lenovo> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <wjkv24h3mpbpnoxk45o0ts96.1283355915765@email.android.com>
On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 11:51:12AM -0400, Don Zickus wrote:
> Top posting because droid won't let me bottom post
>
> This patch was the result of a regression with acpi and preempt.
> Akpm asked that I not change the semantics of the old touch_nmi_watchdog.
> So I tried to revert to the old behaviour.
>
> Sorry for not properly explaining that.
>
yup, stareing at old behaviour I think there is a place where we could
get rid of traversing all cpus: native_cpu_up() -- I don't get the reason why
watchdog counter should be reset on every other cpu as well. Perhaps
I miss something. On the other hands I think changing behaviour of
touch_nmi_watchdog just for one entry might not be worth thing to do :)
> Cheers,
> Don
>
> Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
>
...
> >Ok - can you cite the old watchdog code, did it really do a nr_cpus
> >loop?
> >
> >Thanks,
> >
> > Ingo
-- Cyrill
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-09-01 16:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-09-01 15:51 [PATCH 1/3] [lockup detector] sync touch_*_watchdog back to old semantics Don Zickus
2010-09-01 16:36 ` Cyrill Gorcunov [this message]
2010-09-01 17:15 ` Ingo Molnar
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-09-01 3:00 [PATCH 0/3] lockup detector fixes Don Zickus
2010-09-01 3:00 ` [PATCH 1/3] [lockup detector] sync touch_*_watchdog back to old semantics Don Zickus
2010-09-01 5:30 ` Ingo Molnar
2010-09-01 6:00 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2010-09-01 7:01 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2010-09-01 7:20 ` Ingo Molnar
2010-09-01 7:42 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
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=20100901163632.GA6506@lenovo \
--to=gorcunov@gmail.com \
--cc=dzickus@redhat.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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.