From: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
To: Jeffrey Merkey <jeffmerkey@gmail.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, atomlin@redhat.com,
cmetcalf@ezchip.com, fweisbec@gmail.com,
hidehiro.kawai.ez@hitachi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
mhocko@suse.cz, tj@kernel.org, uobergfe@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] Add WARN() function call to hard-soft lockup
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2016 16:08:46 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160201210846.GC26637@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1454359527-23219-1-git-send-email-jeffmerkey@gmail.com>
On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 01:45:27PM -0700, Jeffrey Merkey wrote:
> This patch series adds config options which can be set during compile to
> direct the compiler to output a breakpoint instruction anywhere a BUG_XX()
> or WARN_XX() macro has been placed in the kernel to trigger the system to
> enter a debugger if a bug is detected by the system. Use of this compile
> time option also allows conditional breakpoints to be set in the kernel
> where these macros have been previously placed.
>
> This addition is extremely useful for debugging hard and soft lockups
> real time and quickly from a console debugger, and other areas of the
> kernel.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeffrey Merkey <jeffmerkey@gmail.com>
> ---
> kernel/watchdog.c | 5 +++++
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/watchdog.c b/kernel/watchdog.c
> index b3ace6e..af07a83 100644
> --- a/kernel/watchdog.c
> +++ b/kernel/watchdog.c
> @@ -358,6 +358,8 @@ static void watchdog_overflow_callback(struct perf_event *event,
> else
> dump_stack();
>
> + WARN(1, "Watchdog detected hard LOCKUP on cpu %d", this_cpu);
> +
So we repeat the same exact print message and dump the same stack again as
we do a few lines above? That doesn't make any sense.
Cheers,
Don
> /*
> * Perform all-CPU dump only once to avoid multiple hardlockups
> * generating interleaving traces
> @@ -478,6 +480,9 @@ static enum hrtimer_restart watchdog_timer_fn(struct hrtimer *hrtimer)
> else
> dump_stack();
>
> + WARN(1, "Watchdog detected soft LOCKUP on cpu %d",
> + smp_processor_id());
> +
> if (softlockup_all_cpu_backtrace) {
> /* Avoid generating two back traces for current
> * given that one is already made above
> --
> 1.8.3.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-01 21:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-01 20:45 [PATCH v2 4/4] Add WARN() function call to hard-soft lockup Jeffrey Merkey
2016-02-01 21:08 ` Don Zickus [this message]
2016-02-01 21:10 ` Jeffrey Merkey
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=20160201210846.GC26637@redhat.com \
--to=dzickus@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=atomlin@redhat.com \
--cc=cmetcalf@ezchip.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=hidehiro.kawai.ez@hitachi.com \
--cc=jeffmerkey@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--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