From: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
To: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>
Cc: "Jörn Engel" <joern@purestorage.com>,
"Spencer Baugh" <sbaugh@catern.com>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Ulrich Obergfell" <uobergfe@redhat.com>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@kernel.org>,
"Andrew Jones" <drjones@redhat.com>,
"chai wen" <chaiw.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>,
"Chris Metcalf" <cmetcalf@ezchip.com>,
"Stephane Eranian" <eranian@google.com>,
"open list" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Spencer Baugh" <Spencer.baugh@purestorage.com>,
"Joern Engel" <joern@logfs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] soft lockup: kill realtime threads before panic
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 09:52:04 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150722135204.GE178524@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1437550528.3106.107.camel@gmail.com>
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 09:35:28AM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-07-21 at 23:33 -0700, Jörn Engel wrote:
>
> > One could argue that killing the realtime thread is even better than
> > panic, as things can restart with a blank slate even faster. But the
> > real benefit is that we get better debug data for the failing component.
> > If we had a kernel bug, the backtrace would usually be sufficient to
> > point fingers. With a bonkers realtime thread, not so much.
>
> If userspace wants a watchdog, it should train a userspace dog, not turn
> the kernel watchdog into a userspace attack dog.
I agree. The spirit of the watchdog was detection and panic (if configured
that way). I don't think adding policy like this works well in the long
run.
Cheers,
Don
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-22 13:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-21 22:07 [PATCH] soft lockup: kill realtime threads before panic Spencer Baugh
2015-07-22 4:36 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-07-22 5:18 ` Jörn Engel
2015-07-22 5:41 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-07-22 6:33 ` Jörn Engel
2015-07-22 7:35 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-07-22 13:52 ` Don Zickus [this message]
2015-07-22 16:35 ` Jörn Engel
2015-07-22 6:59 ` yalin wang
2015-07-22 22:54 ` Andrew Morton
2015-07-22 23:29 ` Jörn Engel
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=20150722135204.GE178524@redhat.com \
--to=dzickus@redhat.com \
--cc=Spencer.baugh@purestorage.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chaiw.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=cmetcalf@ezchip.com \
--cc=drjones@redhat.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=joern@logfs.org \
--cc=joern@purestorage.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=sbaugh@catern.com \
--cc=umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com \
--cc=uobergfe@redhat.com \
/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.