public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lockup_detector: Make DETECT_HUNT_TASK default depend on LOCKUP_DETECTOR
Date: Sun, 8 Aug 2010 21:58:42 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100808195839.GA5387@nowhere> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100807070135.GC23108@elte.hu>

(More Cc)

On Sat, Aug 07, 2010 at 09:01:35AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> (Linus Cc:-ed)
> 
> * Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 09:53:03AM +0800, Li Zefan wrote:
> > > CONFIG_DETECT_SOFTLOCKUP has been removed, so switch the
> > > default value to LOCKUP_DETECTOR.
> > > 
> > > Also fix the help text of BOOT_PRINTK_DELAY.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>
> > > ---
> > 
> > 
> > Acked-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
> > 
> > Thanks.
> 
> The thing is, CONFIG_DETECT_SOFTLOCKUP was default-y before, so many people 
> had it enabled [and had it forced-enabled if DEBUG_KERNEL was off], even if 
> they didnt really want or need it.



Hmm. It was:

config DETECT_SOFTLOCKUP
	bool "Detect Soft Lockups"
	depends on DEBUG_KERNEL && !S390
	default y


It means it's default enabled only if DEBUG_KERNEL, right?
Then if you don't select CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL, it's fine as it won't
be selected.

But I agree with you. There is a bunch of config options for which
selection is a duty when you are a kernel developer:
PROVE_LOCKING, DETECT_HUNG_TASK, DEBUG_PREEMPT, PROVE_RCU, etc...
Because they all show (or prove we can have) bugs that one might miss
without these options. Softlockups are rarely part of them because even
without the lockup detector enabled, you'll observe something is wrong.



> So i turned off the new generic watchdog code's default intentionally - as it 
> clearly does not cure cancer ;-)


:-)


 
> I think distros will enable it, and most testers will as well. Those who dont 
> enable it and run into a lockup have an easy option to enable.



Why distros would want to enable it? The lockup detector introduces overhead.



> Maybe a better change would be to make it more generally available - right now 
> it's:
> 
>  config LOCKUP_DETECTOR
>          bool "Detect Hard and Soft Lockups"
>          depends on DEBUG_KERNEL && !S390
> 
> which means that it cannot be enabled when DEBUG_KERNEL is off.
> 
> So i think we should:
> 
>  - Remove the s390 hack and add an ARCH_HAS_LOCKUP_DETECTOR flag



If we do this, we'll need to add this config on every archs but s390.
We should better have ARCH_WANT_NO_LOCKUP_DETECTOR. I know that
"negative" meaning configs suck, but otherwise we would lose this
support on many archs.

Why s390 doesn't want the softlockup detector to begin with?



>  - Remove the DEBUG_KERNEL dependency


Yeah.


  reply	other threads:[~2010-08-08 19:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-08-04  1:53 [PATCH] lockup_detector: Make DETECT_HUNT_TASK default depend on LOCKUP_DETECTOR Li Zefan
2010-08-06  0:58 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-08-07  7:01   ` Ingo Molnar
2010-08-08 19:58     ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2010-08-08 21:23       ` Ingo Molnar
2010-08-08 21:47         ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-08-09  8:07       ` Heiko Carstens
2010-08-09 13:49         ` Don Zickus
2010-08-09 14:21           ` Heiko Carstens
2010-08-17  6:03       ` Li Zefan

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=20100808195839.GA5387@nowhere \
    --to=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=dzickus@redhat.com \
    --cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /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