From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>
To: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
peterz@infradead.org, fweisbec@gmail.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] [lockup detector] sync touch_*_watchdog back to old semantics
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2010 20:36:32 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100901163632.GA6506@lenovo> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <wjkv24h3mpbpnoxk45o0ts96.1283355915765@email.android.com>
On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 11:51:12AM -0400, Don Zickus wrote:
> Top posting because droid won't let me bottom post
>
> This patch was the result of a regression with acpi and preempt.
> Akpm asked that I not change the semantics of the old touch_nmi_watchdog.
> So I tried to revert to the old behaviour.
>
> Sorry for not properly explaining that.
>
yup, stareing at old behaviour I think there is a place where we could
get rid of traversing all cpus: native_cpu_up() -- I don't get the reason why
watchdog counter should be reset on every other cpu as well. Perhaps
I miss something. On the other hands I think changing behaviour of
touch_nmi_watchdog just for one entry might not be worth thing to do :)
> Cheers,
> Don
>
> Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
>
...
> >Ok - can you cite the old watchdog code, did it really do a nr_cpus
> >loop?
> >
> >Thanks,
> >
> > Ingo
-- Cyrill
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-09-01 16:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-09-01 15:51 [PATCH 1/3] [lockup detector] sync touch_*_watchdog back to old semantics Don Zickus
2010-09-01 16:36 ` Cyrill Gorcunov [this message]
2010-09-01 17:15 ` Ingo Molnar
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-09-01 3:00 [PATCH 0/3] lockup detector fixes Don Zickus
2010-09-01 3:00 ` [PATCH 1/3] [lockup detector] sync touch_*_watchdog back to old semantics Don Zickus
2010-09-01 5:30 ` Ingo Molnar
2010-09-01 6:00 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2010-09-01 7:01 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2010-09-01 7:20 ` Ingo Molnar
2010-09-01 7:42 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
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=20100901163632.GA6506@lenovo \
--to=gorcunov@gmail.com \
--cc=dzickus@redhat.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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