From: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
To: Jeffrey Merkey <jeffmerkey@gmail.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, atomlin@redhat.com,
cmetcalf@ezchip.com, fweisbec@gmail.com,
hidehiro.kawai.ez@hitachi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
mhocko@suse.cz, tj@kernel.org, uobergfe@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] Add WARN() function call to hard-soft lockup
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2016 16:08:46 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160201210846.GC26637@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1454359527-23219-1-git-send-email-jeffmerkey@gmail.com>
On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 01:45:27PM -0700, Jeffrey Merkey wrote:
> This patch series adds config options which can be set during compile to
> direct the compiler to output a breakpoint instruction anywhere a BUG_XX()
> or WARN_XX() macro has been placed in the kernel to trigger the system to
> enter a debugger if a bug is detected by the system. Use of this compile
> time option also allows conditional breakpoints to be set in the kernel
> where these macros have been previously placed.
>
> This addition is extremely useful for debugging hard and soft lockups
> real time and quickly from a console debugger, and other areas of the
> kernel.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeffrey Merkey <jeffmerkey@gmail.com>
> ---
> kernel/watchdog.c | 5 +++++
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/watchdog.c b/kernel/watchdog.c
> index b3ace6e..af07a83 100644
> --- a/kernel/watchdog.c
> +++ b/kernel/watchdog.c
> @@ -358,6 +358,8 @@ static void watchdog_overflow_callback(struct perf_event *event,
> else
> dump_stack();
>
> + WARN(1, "Watchdog detected hard LOCKUP on cpu %d", this_cpu);
> +
So we repeat the same exact print message and dump the same stack again as
we do a few lines above? That doesn't make any sense.
Cheers,
Don
> /*
> * Perform all-CPU dump only once to avoid multiple hardlockups
> * generating interleaving traces
> @@ -478,6 +480,9 @@ static enum hrtimer_restart watchdog_timer_fn(struct hrtimer *hrtimer)
> else
> dump_stack();
>
> + WARN(1, "Watchdog detected soft LOCKUP on cpu %d",
> + smp_processor_id());
> +
> if (softlockup_all_cpu_backtrace) {
> /* Avoid generating two back traces for current
> * given that one is already made above
> --
> 1.8.3.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-01 21:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-01 20:45 [PATCH v2 4/4] Add WARN() function call to hard-soft lockup Jeffrey Merkey
2016-02-01 21:08 ` Don Zickus [this message]
2016-02-01 21:10 ` Jeffrey Merkey
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=20160201210846.GC26637@redhat.com \
--to=dzickus@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=atomlin@redhat.com \
--cc=cmetcalf@ezchip.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=hidehiro.kawai.ez@hitachi.com \
--cc=jeffmerkey@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--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.