From: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
To: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>
Cc: "Jörn Engel" <joern@purestorage.com>,
"Spencer Baugh" <sbaugh@catern.com>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Ulrich Obergfell" <uobergfe@redhat.com>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@kernel.org>,
"Andrew Jones" <drjones@redhat.com>,
"chai wen" <chaiw.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>,
"Chris Metcalf" <cmetcalf@ezchip.com>,
"Stephane Eranian" <eranian@google.com>,
"open list" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Spencer Baugh" <Spencer.baugh@purestorage.com>,
"Joern Engel" <joern@logfs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] soft lockup: kill realtime threads before panic
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 09:52:04 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150722135204.GE178524@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1437550528.3106.107.camel@gmail.com>
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 09:35:28AM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-07-21 at 23:33 -0700, Jörn Engel wrote:
>
> > One could argue that killing the realtime thread is even better than
> > panic, as things can restart with a blank slate even faster. But the
> > real benefit is that we get better debug data for the failing component.
> > If we had a kernel bug, the backtrace would usually be sufficient to
> > point fingers. With a bonkers realtime thread, not so much.
>
> If userspace wants a watchdog, it should train a userspace dog, not turn
> the kernel watchdog into a userspace attack dog.
I agree. The spirit of the watchdog was detection and panic (if configured
that way). I don't think adding policy like this works well in the long
run.
Cheers,
Don
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-22 13:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-21 22:07 [PATCH] soft lockup: kill realtime threads before panic Spencer Baugh
2015-07-22 4:36 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-07-22 5:18 ` Jörn Engel
2015-07-22 5:41 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-07-22 6:33 ` Jörn Engel
2015-07-22 7:35 ` Mike Galbraith
2015-07-22 13:52 ` Don Zickus [this message]
2015-07-22 16:35 ` Jörn Engel
2015-07-22 6:59 ` yalin wang
2015-07-22 22:54 ` Andrew Morton
2015-07-22 23:29 ` Jörn Engel
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=20150722135204.GE178524@redhat.com \
--to=dzickus@redhat.com \
--cc=Spencer.baugh@purestorage.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chaiw.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=cmetcalf@ezchip.com \
--cc=drjones@redhat.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=joern@logfs.org \
--cc=joern@purestorage.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=sbaugh@catern.com \
--cc=umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com \
--cc=uobergfe@redhat.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