From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755170Ab0DVS4x (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Apr 2010 14:56:53 -0400 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.156]:63288 "EHLO fg-out-1718.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755040Ab0DVS4v (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Apr 2010 14:56:51 -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=Br3A+2dIB6laL4FLDpj67Gjk/vTRIuzk7Jffj+qRXD/jvXqbRXB79s5+128HInPDGo g6pFbLSO6amFnpLEx4R/kNpuHyoZ1qeCIh6/puKL2zAObOLyF0LQOtvtChc4i4x1mTy0 g+7+nuRTRlzuXgyW0vRoqOWkaxd0HkE2CvmJg= Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 20:53:35 +0200 From: Frederic Weisbecker To: Don Zickus Cc: mingo@elte.hu, peterz@infradead.org, gorcunov@gmail.com, aris@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, randy.dunlap@oracle.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] [watchdog] convert touch_softlockup_watchdog to touch_watchdog Message-ID: <20100422185333.GB5600@nowhere> References: <1271777043-3807-1-git-send-email-dzickus@redhat.com> <1271777043-3807-3-git-send-email-dzickus@redhat.com> <20100421204559.GB8677@nowhere> <20100421213142.GY15159@redhat.com> <20100421214610.GE8677@nowhere> <20100422132025.GZ15159@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100422132025.GZ15159@redhat.com> 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 Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 09:20:25AM -0400, Don Zickus wrote: > On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 11:46:12PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > > > Hence I guess we want to keep the current state: > > > > > > > > - touch_nmi_watchdog() = touch softlockup and nmi watchdogs > > > > - touch_softlockup_watchdog() = only touch softlockup watchdog > > > > > > Hmm ok I see what you are saying. A little tweak and I have this > > > compiled-tested only patch that I think satisifies you. > > > > > > I didn't really touch the touch_nmi_watchdog() code in the kernel, so it > > > still calls a stub function in kernel/watchdog.c. Add a boolean to that > > > path and I think it accomplishes the logic you are looking for. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Don > > > > > > Yeah looks good. > > > > Could you send this patch with a changelog and your sign-off? > > I thought about including it when I refresh the patch series with the > other changes you suggested. Do you prefer it to be separate? I was about to apply the series because there were mostly minor things to fix. But I would indeed prefer you repost a new series with the reviews addressed, whatever this patch is a delta or a fixed existing one. I will more likely forget things in the middle than you will. Thanks.