From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756486Ab0DEULX (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Apr 2010 16:11:23 -0400 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.157]:5987 "EHLO fg-out-1718.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756456Ab0DEULR (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Apr 2010 16:11:17 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=dLL5PuW4JWkviTYgxzmkYqa9Q7bWIeUyfQfSYEMqRTMExSuHuAAvhN5rc2a+zjBh1t isjfvdhf/jzfzIIdK8qa/p5WAIBx9ur1sPuYl1QaaJg7/NWRidTVEtY/X1nvMLJnoHbu rNTqKBF8Yq81Ikea0c62P2Lbj5wk+UbyXqFv4= Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 00:11:11 +0400 From: Cyrill Gorcunov To: Aristeu Sergio Rozanski Filho Cc: Don Zickus , mingo@elte.hu, peterz@infradead.org, aris@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [watchdog] combine nmi_watchdog and softlockup Message-ID: <20100405201111.GF5079@lenovo> References: <20100323213338.GA29170@redhat.com> <20100328024650.GA26522@jake.ruivo.org> <20100329182617.GI15159@redhat.com> <20100330145238.GG6706@cathedrallabs.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100330145238.GG6706@cathedrallabs.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 10:52:38AM -0400, Aristeu Sergio Rozanski Filho wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 10:46:50PM -0400, Aristeu Sergio Rozanski Filho wrote: > > > Hi Don, > > > > +/* deprecated */ > > > > +static int __init nosoftlockup_setup(char *str) > > > > +{ > > > > + no_watchdog = 1; > > > > + return 1; > > > > +} > > > > +__setup("nosoftlockup", nosoftlockup_setup); > > > > +static int __init nonmi_watchdog_setup(char *str) > > > > +{ > > > > + no_watchdog = 1; > > > > + return 1; > > > > +} > > > > +__setup("nonmi_watchdog", nonmi_watchdog_setup); > > > didn't you just add nonmi_watchdog parameter? I don't think there's a reason > > > to keep compatibility here. > > > > Hmm, I think you are right. I thought I added that because it existed in > > the old nmi_watchdog setup but I can't find it. So yeah, I can drop that. > you could provide a nmi_watchdog=0 backwards compatibility and warn about > values != 0 > > -- > Aristeu > Sorry for a long delay, I think we might need to inform a user that "lapic", "ioapic" is no longer used (perf-nmi is supposed to substitute the former nmi code in a long term right?) so that for some time period, say the whole release cycle, if lapic or ioapic, or numbers are passed to nmi_watchdog= setup option we would just print out that the parameters are deprecated and better to not use them any longer. Hm? -- Cyrill