From: Laurent Dufour <ldufour@linux.ibm.com>
To: Nathan Lynch <nathanl@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, npiggin@gmail.com,
paulus@samba.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
haren@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] pseries/mobility: Set NMI watchdog factor during LPM
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2022 16:09:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <040a8f52-980f-146c-6811-9a0ce9157f08@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87sfnvmgql.fsf@linux.ibm.com>
On 23/06/2022, 19:28:34, Nathan Lynch wrote:
> Laurent Dufour <ldufour@linux.ibm.com> writes:
>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/mobility.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/mobility.c
>> index 179bbd4ae881..4284ceaf9060 100644
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/mobility.c
>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/mobility.c
>> @@ -48,6 +48,39 @@ struct update_props_workarea {
>> #define MIGRATION_SCOPE (1)
>> #define PRRN_SCOPE -2
>>
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC_WATCHDOG
>> +static unsigned int lpm_nmi_wd_factor = 200;
>> +
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_SYSCTL
>> +static struct ctl_table lpm_nmi_wd_factor_ctl_table[] = {
>> + {
>> + .procname = "lpm_nmi_watchdog_factor",
>
> Assuming the basic idea is acceptable, I suggest making the user-visible
> name more generic (e.g. "nmi_watchdog_factor") in case it makes sense to
> apply this to other contexts in the future.
Fair enough, indeed, I was wondering if "lpm" is meaningful.
>
>> + .data = &lpm_nmi_wd_factor,
>> + .maxlen = sizeof(int),
>> + .mode = 0644,
>> + .proc_handler = proc_douintvec_minmax,
>> + },
>> + {}
>> +};
>> +static struct ctl_table lpm_nmi_wd_factor_sysctl_root[] = {
>> + {
>> + .procname = "kernel",
>> + .mode = 0555,
>> + .child = lpm_nmi_wd_factor_ctl_table,
>> + },
>> + {}
>> +};
>> +
>> +static int __init register_lpm_nmi_wd_factor_sysctl(void)
>> +{
>> + register_sysctl_table(lpm_nmi_wd_factor_sysctl_root);
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +device_initcall(register_lpm_nmi_wd_factor_sysctl);
>> +#endif /* CONFIG_SYSCTL */
>> +#endif /* CONFIG_PPC_WATCHDOG */
>> +
>> static int mobility_rtas_call(int token, char *buf, s32 scope)
>> {
>> int rc;
>> @@ -702,6 +735,7 @@ static int pseries_suspend(u64 handle)
>> static int pseries_migrate_partition(u64 handle)
>> {
>> int ret;
>> + unsigned int factor = lpm_nmi_wd_factor;
>>
>> ret = wait_for_vasi_session_suspending(handle);
>> if (ret)
>> @@ -709,6 +743,13 @@ static int pseries_migrate_partition(u64 handle)
>>
>> vas_migration_handler(VAS_SUSPEND);
>>
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC_WATCHDOG
>> + if (factor) {
>> + pr_info("Set the NMI watchdog factor to %u%%\n", factor);
>> + watchdog_nmi_set_lpm_factor(factor);
>> + }
>> +#endif /* CONFIG_PPC_WATCHDOG */
>> +
>> ret = pseries_suspend(handle);
>> if (ret == 0) {
>> post_mobility_fixup();
>> @@ -716,6 +757,13 @@ static int pseries_migrate_partition(u64 handle)
>> } else
>> pseries_cancel_migration(handle, ret);
>>
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC_WATCHDOG
>> + if (factor) {
>> + pr_info("Restoring NMI watchdog timer\n");
>> + watchdog_nmi_set_lpm_factor(0);
>> + }
>> +#endif /* CONFIG_PPC_WATCHDOG */
>> +
>
> A couple more suggestions:
>
> * Move the prints into a single statement in watchdog_nmi_set_lpm_factor().
You're right that sounds a better place.
>
> * Add no-op versions of watchdog_nmi_set_lpm_factor for
> !CONFIG_PPC_WATCHDOG so we can minimize the #ifdef here.
>
Furthermore, this breaks compilation when !CONFIG_PPC_WATCHDOG because
lpm_nmi_wd_factor is not defined. I'll rework that part.
> Otherwise this looks fine to me.
Thanks,
Laurent.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-24 14:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-14 13:54 [PATCH v2 0/4] Extending NMI watchdog during LPM Laurent Dufour
2022-06-14 13:54 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] powerpc/mobility: Wait for memory transfer to complete Laurent Dufour
2022-06-21 16:52 ` Nathan Lynch
2022-06-14 13:54 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] watchdog: export watchdog_mutex and lockup_detector_reconfigure Laurent Dufour
2022-06-24 6:31 ` Michael Ellerman
2022-06-24 8:27 ` Laurent Dufour
2022-06-24 9:37 ` Christoph Hellwig
2022-06-24 12:45 ` Laurent Dufour
2022-06-14 13:54 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] powerpc/watchdog: introduce a LPM factor Laurent Dufour
2022-06-22 9:26 ` kernel test robot
2022-06-14 13:54 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] pseries/mobility: Set NMI watchdog factor during LPM Laurent Dufour
2022-06-23 17:28 ` Nathan Lynch
2022-06-24 14:09 ` Laurent Dufour [this message]
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=040a8f52-980f-146c-6811-9a0ce9157f08@linux.ibm.com \
--to=ldufour@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=haren@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=nathanl@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=paulus@samba.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).