From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 2/3] pvclock: detect watchdog reset at pvclock read
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2013 10:39:04 +0200
Message-ID: <52551628.5080800@redhat.com>
References: <20131008010515.516032211@amt.cnet> <20131008010552.779616517@amt.cnet> <5253D732.8060906@redhat.com> <20131009012230.GA27210@amt.cnet>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, dzickus@redhat.com, gleb@redhat.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
To: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20131009012230.GA27210@amt.cnet>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org

Il 09/10/2013 03:22, Marcelo Tosatti ha scritto:
> On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 11:58:10AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Il 08/10/2013 03:05, Marcelo Tosatti ha scritto:
>>> +void pvclock_touch_watchdogs(void)
>>> +{
>>> +	touch_softlockup_watchdog_sync();
>>> +	clocksource_touch_watchdog();
>>> +	rcu_cpu_stall_reset();
>>> +	reset_hung_task_detector();
>>> +}
>>> +
>>
>> Should this function be in kernel/ instead?  It's not really
>> pvclock-specific.
>>
>> Paolo
> 
> kernel/watchdog.c is configurable via CONFIG_LOCKUP_DETECTOR, so its not
> appropriate.
> 
> And, the choice of watchdogs to reset might be different for the caller.
> 

Thanks for clarifying.

Paolo