From: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
To: mingo@elte.hu, fweisbec@gmail.com
Cc: peterz@infradead.org, gorcunov@gmail.com, aris@redhat.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, randy.dunlap@oracle.com,
dzickus@redhat.com
Subject: [PATCH 8/8] [watchdog] separate touch_nmi_watchdog code path from touch_watchdog
Date: Fri, 7 May 2010 17:11:51 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1273266711-18706-9-git-send-email-dzickus@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1273266711-18706-1-git-send-email-dzickus@redhat.com>
When I combined the nmi_watchdog (hardlockup) and softlockup code, I
also combined the paths the touch_watchdog and touch_nmi_watchdog took.
This may not be the best idea as pointed out by Frederic W., that the
touch_watchdog case probably should not reset the hardlockup count.
Therefore the patch belows falls back to the previous idea of keeping
the touch_nmi_watchdog a superset of the touch_watchdog case.
Signed-off-by: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
---
kernel/watchdog.c | 7 ++++---
1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/watchdog.c b/kernel/watchdog.c
index 80a282c..09fb804 100644
--- a/kernel/watchdog.c
+++ b/kernel/watchdog.c
@@ -31,6 +31,7 @@ int watchdog_enabled;
int __read_mostly softlockup_thresh = 60;
static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, watchdog_touch_ts);
+static DEFINE_PER_CPU(bool, watchdog_nmi_touch);
static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct task_struct *, softlockup_watchdog);
static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct hrtimer, watchdog_hrtimer);
static DEFINE_PER_CPU(bool, softlockup_touch_sync);
@@ -145,6 +146,7 @@ void touch_softlockup_watchdog_sync(void)
void touch_nmi_watchdog(void)
{
+ __get_cpu_var(watchdog_nmi_touch) = true;
touch_softlockup_watchdog();
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(touch_nmi_watchdog);
@@ -201,10 +203,9 @@ void watchdog_overflow_callback(struct perf_event *event, int nmi,
struct pt_regs *regs)
{
int this_cpu = smp_processor_id();
- unsigned long touch_ts = per_cpu(watchdog_touch_ts, this_cpu);
- if (touch_ts == 0) {
- __touch_watchdog();
+ if (__get_cpu_var(watchdog_nmi_touch) == true) {
+ __get_cpu_var(watchdog_nmi_touch) = false;
return;
}
--
1.7.0.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-05-07 21:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-05-07 21:11 [PATCH 0/8] lockup detector changes Don Zickus
2010-05-07 21:11 ` [PATCH 1/8] [watchdog] combine nmi_watchdog and softlockup Don Zickus
2010-05-12 19:55 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-05-13 6:51 ` [tip:perf/nmi] lockup_detector: Combine nmi_watchdog and softlockup detector tip-bot for Don Zickus
2010-05-07 21:11 ` [PATCH 2/8] [nmi watchdog] touch_softlockup cleanups and softlockup_tick removal Don Zickus
2010-05-12 20:06 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-05-12 20:26 ` Don Zickus
2010-05-12 20:28 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-05-12 20:56 ` Don Zickus
2010-05-12 21:00 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-05-12 21:38 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2010-05-12 21:50 ` Don Zickus
2010-05-13 15:53 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2010-05-13 16:04 ` Don Zickus
2010-05-13 6:52 ` [tip:perf/nmi] lockup_detector: Touch_softlockup " tip-bot for Don Zickus
2010-05-07 21:11 ` [PATCH 3/8] [watchdog] remove old softlockup code Don Zickus
2010-05-13 6:52 ` [tip:perf/nmi] lockup_detector: Remove " tip-bot for Don Zickus
2010-05-07 21:11 ` [PATCH 4/8] [watchdog] remove nmi_watchdog.c file Don Zickus
2010-05-13 6:52 ` [tip:perf/nmi] lockup_detector: Remove " tip-bot for Don Zickus
2010-05-07 21:11 ` [PATCH 5/8] [x86] watchdog: move trigger_all_cpu_backtrace to its own die_notifier Don Zickus
2010-05-13 6:53 ` [tip:perf/nmi] x86: Move " tip-bot for Don Zickus
2010-05-07 21:11 ` [PATCH 6/8] [x86] watchdog: cleanup hw_nmi.c cruft Don Zickus
2010-05-13 6:53 ` [tip:perf/nmi] x86: Cleanup " tip-bot for Don Zickus
2010-05-07 21:11 ` [PATCH 7/8] [watchdog] resolve softlockup.c conflicts Don Zickus
2010-05-07 21:11 ` Don Zickus [this message]
2010-05-13 6:53 ` [tip:perf/nmi] lockup_detector: Separate touch_nmi_watchdog code path from touch_watchdog tip-bot for Don Zickus
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-04-23 16:13 [PATCH 0/8] lockup detector changes Don Zickus
2010-04-23 16:13 ` [PATCH 8/8] [watchdog] separate touch_nmi_watchdog code path from touch_watchdog Don Zickus
2010-04-28 12:48 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-04-28 20:28 ` Don Zickus
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=1273266711-18706-9-git-send-email-dzickus@redhat.com \
--to=dzickus@redhat.com \
--cc=aris@redhat.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=gorcunov@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=randy.dunlap@oracle.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 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).