From: Aristeu Rozanski <aris@redhat.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: "Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"Peter Zijlstra" <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
"Frédéric Weisbecker" <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86: introduce NMI_AUTO as nmi_watchdog option
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 10:19:29 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091104151929.GH18613@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091104114630.GA16993@elte.hu>
> > NMI_AUTO is a new nmi_watchdog option that makes LAPIC be tried first
> > and if the CPU isn't supported, IOAPIC will be used. It's useful in
> > cases where NMI watchdog is enabled by default in a kernel built for
> > different machines. It can be configured by default or selected with
> > nmi_watchdog=3 or nmi_watchdog=auto parameters.
>
> What i'd like to see for the NMI watchdog is much more ambitious than
> this: the use of perf events to run a periodic NMI callback.
>
> The NMI watchdog would cause the creation of a per-cpu perf_event
> structure (in-kernel). All x86 CPUs that have perf event support (the
> majority of them) will thus be able to have an NMI watchdog using a
> nice, generic piece of code and we'd be able to phase out the open-coded
> NMI watchdog code.
>
> The user would not notice much from this: we'd still have the
> /proc/sys/kernel/nmi_watchdog toggle to turn it on/off, and we'd still
> have the nmi_watchog= boot parameter as well. But the underlying
> implementation would be far more generic and far more usable than the
> current code.
>
> Would you be interested in moving the NMI watchdog code in this
> direction? Most of the perf events changes (callbacks, helpers for
> in-kernel event allocations, etc.) are in latest -tip already, so you
> could use that as a base.
but that would work only for LAPIC. You're suggesting killing IOAPIC mode too?
--
Aristeu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-11-04 15:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-11-03 17:10 [PATCH 2/2] x86: introduce NMI_AUTO as nmi_watchdog option Aristeu Rozanski
2009-11-04 11:46 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-04 12:33 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2009-11-04 17:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-04 15:19 ` Aristeu Rozanski [this message]
2009-11-04 15:56 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-05 10:57 ` Mikael Pettersson
2009-11-08 8:57 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-09 20:02 ` Aristeu Rozanski
2009-11-10 5:20 ` Ingo Molnar
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=20091104151929.GH18613@redhat.com \
--to=aris@redhat.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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