public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
To: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] watchdog:  touch_nmi_watchdog should only touch local cpu not every one
Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2010 23:09:11 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101107220909.GF11134@nowhere> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1288919932-1857-1-git-send-email-dzickus@redhat.com>

On Thu, Nov 04, 2010 at 09:18:52PM -0400, Don Zickus wrote:
> I ran into a scenario where while one cpu was stuck and should have panic'd
> because of the NMI watchdog, it didn't.  The reason was another cpu was spewing
> stack dumps on to the console.  Upon investigation, I noticed that when writing
> to the console and also when dumping the stack, the watchdog is touched.
> 
> This causes all the cpus to reset their NMI watchdog flags and the 'stuck' cpu
> just spins forever.
> 
> This change causes the semantics of touch_nmi_watchdog to be changed slightly.
> Previously, I accidentally changed the semantics and we noticed there was a
> codepath in which touch_nmi_watchdog could be touched from a preemtible area.
> That caused a BUG() to happen when CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT was enabled.  I believe
> it was the acpi code.
> 
> My attempt here re-introduces the change to have the touch_nmi_watchdog() code
> only touch the local cpu instead of all of the cpus.  But instead of using
> __get_cpu_var(), I use the __raw_get_cpu_var() version.
> 
> This avoids the preemption problem.  However my reasoning wasn't because I was
> trying to be lazy.  Instead I rationalized it as, well if preemption is enabled
> then interrupts should be enabled to and the NMI watchdog will have no reason
> to trigger.  So it won't matter if the wrong cpu is touched because the percpu
> interrupt counters the NMI watchdog uses should still be incrementing.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
> ---
>  kernel/watchdog.c |   17 ++++++++++++++++-
>  1 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/watchdog.c b/kernel/watchdog.c
> index dc8e168..dd0c140 100644
> --- a/kernel/watchdog.c
> +++ b/kernel/watchdog.c
> @@ -141,6 +141,21 @@ void touch_all_softlockup_watchdogs(void)
>  #ifdef CONFIG_HARDLOCKUP_DETECTOR
>  void touch_nmi_watchdog(void)
>  {
> +	/*
> +	 * Using __raw here because some code paths have
> +	 * preemption enabled.  If preemption is enabled
> +	 * then interrupts should be enabled too, in which
> +	 * case we shouldn't have to worry about the watchdog
> +	 * going off.
> +	 */
> +	__raw_get_cpu_var(watchdog_nmi_touch) = true;
> +
> +	touch_softlockup_watchdog();
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(touch_nmi_watchdog);



Did the old watchdog also touched every CPUs?

That doesn't appear to be a good thing, we may indeed miss hardlockups
because of that.

And it seems you can drop touch_all_nmi_watchdogs() as, like others
pointed out, there are no users of it.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2010-11-07 22:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-11-05  1:18 [PATCH] watchdog: touch_nmi_watchdog should only touch local cpu not every one Don Zickus
2010-11-05 13:51 ` Sergey Senozhatsky
2010-11-05 19:58   ` Andrew Morton
2010-11-08 13:37     ` Don Zickus
2010-11-07 22:09 ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2010-11-08 13:38   ` Don Zickus
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2013-12-05  3:12 [PATCH v2] watchdog: Add a sysctl to disable soft lockup detector Don Zickus
2013-12-05 20:42 ` [PATCH] watchdog: touch_nmi_watchdog should only touch local cpu not every one Ben Zhang
2013-12-16 15:55   ` Don Zickus

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=20101107220909.GF11134@nowhere \
    --to=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dzickus@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com \
    /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