From: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
To: Mike Lykov <combr@yandex.ru>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org,
kirill@shutemov.name
Subject: Re: [BUG?] false positive in soft lockup detector while unlzma initramfs on slow cpu
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 10:33:48 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130129153348.GR98867@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5107D1D3.6040105@yandex.ru>
Hi Mike,
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 05:42:43PM +0400, Mike Lykov wrote:
>
> So my questions:
>
> 1. Are there a BUG in soft lockup detection mechanizm? Changing
> watchdog_thresh to 30 have a side effect in production - D-state
> userspace processes will be detected slowly. Are there a need to
> detecting soft lockups at boot time? Maybe it need after initramfs
> boot only when userspace processes begin to work?
The softlockup mechanism works scheduling a high priority task that kicks
the softlockups. If the unzip thread is taking too long, it could
accidentally trip the detection.
Seeing that you are running on a 600 MHz machine, it could be possible.
Though I am not entirely sure how the scheduling works for decompressing
the initramfs. I wouldn't think it is that high of a priority.
>
> 2. How to change watchdog_thresh parameter at boot without patching
> sources? If it necessary (with it side effects) maybe implement it
> as commandline parameter or config compile time parameter?
I attached a patch below that allows you to set it a boot time. Let me
know if this works for you, then I can clean it up and post it properly.
Cheers,
Don
diff --git a/kernel/watchdog.c b/kernel/watchdog.c
index 75a2ab3..e448d63 100644
--- a/kernel/watchdog.c
+++ b/kernel/watchdog.c
@@ -79,6 +79,14 @@ static int __init softlockup_panic_setup(char *str)
}
__setup("softlockup_panic=", softlockup_panic_setup);
+static int __init watchdog_thresh_setup(char *str)
+{
+ watchdog_thresh = simple_strtoul(str, NULL, 0);
+
+ return 1;
+}
+__setup("watchdog_thresh=", watchdog_thresh_setup);
+
static int __init nowatchdog_setup(char *str)
{
watchdog_enabled = 0;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-29 15:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-29 13:42 [BUG?] false positive in soft lockup detector while unlzma initramfs on slow cpu Mike Lykov
2013-01-29 15:33 ` Don Zickus [this message]
2013-01-29 17:18 ` anish kumar
2013-01-30 15:51 ` Don Zickus
2013-01-30 15:59 ` anish kumar
2013-01-29 23:59 ` Andrew Morton
2013-01-31 11:18 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-01-30 9:39 ` Mike Lykov
2013-01-30 15:40 ` Don Zickus
2013-01-31 11:21 ` Mike Lykov
2013-01-31 14:46 ` Don Zickus
2013-02-01 10:44 ` Mike Lykov
2013-02-01 15:59 ` Don Zickus
2013-02-01 16:43 ` Mike Lykov
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=20130129153348.GR98867@redhat.com \
--to=dzickus@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=combr@yandex.ru \
--cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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