From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751722AbXC1Nua (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Mar 2007 09:50:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751834AbXC1Nua (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Mar 2007 09:50:30 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:49714 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751722AbXC1Nua (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Mar 2007 09:50:30 -0400 From: Andi Kleen Organization: SUSE Linux Products GmbH, Nuernberg, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nuernberg) To: virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [patch 3/4] Locally disable the softlockup watchdog rather than touching it Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 15:50:04 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5 Cc: Prarit Bhargava , Jeremy Fitzhardinge , virtualization@lists.osdl.org, Andrew Morton , Ingo Molnar , John Hawkes , Linux Kernel , Eric Dumazet References: <20070327214919.800272641@goop.org> <20070327215828.085422178@goop.org> <460A6EC0.4020701@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <460A6EC0.4020701@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200703281550.04224.ak@suse.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wednesday 28 March 2007 15:33, Prarit Bhargava wrote: > > Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > > > > I haven't really worked out how this should interact with the nmi > > watchdog; touch_nmi_watchdog() still ends up calling > > touch_softlockup_watchdog(), so there's still some redundancy here. > > > > > > touch_nmi_watchdog is attempting to tickle _all_ CPUs softlockup watchdogs. It is supposed to only touch the current CPU, just like it only touches the NMI watchdog on the current CPU. > > Currently, the code is incorrect -- it is calling > touch_softlockup_watchdog which touches only the current CPU's > softlockup watchdog. Sounds correct to me. -Andi >