From: Jan-Benedict Glaw <jbglaw@lug-owl.de>
To: parisc-linux@parisc-linux.org
Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] Watchdog on parisc?
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 10:42:35 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030216094234.GG351@lug-owl.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030216083110.GC18888@dsl2.external.hp.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2319 bytes --]
On Sun, 2003-02-16 01:31:10 -0700, Grant Grundler <grundler@dsl2.external.hp.com>
wrote in message <20030216083110.GC18888@dsl2.external.hp.com>:
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 07:11:24PM +0100, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > I'm currently playing a bit with my B132L and 715. They're working quite
> > nice, except that kernels aren't too stable (gcc-3.2, I'll do some more
> > test compiles with gcc-3.0, too).
>
> gcc-3.2.1 has a few bugs that have bitten us already (search mail
> archive on "pty.c"). I'm not sure if it's better to stick with
> gcc 3.0 or grab something that's bleeding edge (gcc 3.3.x).
Yeah, I know. I followed that thread. gcc-3.0 seems to produce a more
stable kernel, but even there are some gotchas (eg. strace'ing programs
often leads to stuck userland while I still can ping the box or complete
the three-way-handshake of a starting TCP connection...).
I'd possibly spend some time in invensting this...
> > I've looked through the docs available if a watchdog is mentioned. In
> > ./docs/platforms/b1xx-service.pdf there's a watchdog timeout error
> > declared (during selftest) so I *think* there is a watchdog, isn't
> > there?
>
> I'm not sure what this is refering to. The CPU has some HW checking
> that is a sort of watchdog but it's CPU internal and only the firmware
> touches those.
So there's nothing what's like a watchdog as you know it from some
machines (SGI Indys for example) or as add-on cards in machines (PCI/ISA
cards).
> > I've not yet seen a driver for it, nor have I seen any
> > documentation. Is there a watchdog (and possibly some docu or an hpux
> > vmunix to disassemble) so I could possibly write something better than
> > softdog.c?
>
> not if it's what I'm thinking of (transaction timeout, ie causes an
> HPMC). This is a built-in HW feature.
Hmmm... Triggering a HPMC would be a neat feature. So we could think
about a way to initiate something that, if not handled, would trigger a
HPMC some 60 seconds later:-?
MfG, JBG
--
Jan-Benedict Glaw jbglaw@lug-owl.de . +49-172-7608481
"Eine Freie Meinung in einem Freien Kopf | Gegen Zensur
fuer einen Freien Staat voll Freier Bürger" | im Internet!
Shell Script APT-Proxy: http://lug-owl.de/~jbglaw/software/ap2/
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-02-16 9:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-02-14 18:11 [parisc-linux] Watchdog on parisc? Jan-Benedict Glaw
2003-02-16 8:31 ` Grant Grundler
2003-02-16 9:42 ` Jan-Benedict Glaw [this message]
2003-02-17 5:11 ` Grant Grundler
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=20030216094234.GG351@lug-owl.de \
--to=jbglaw@lug-owl.de \
--cc=parisc-linux@parisc-linux.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox