From: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
To: Josh Hunt <johunt@akamai.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, uobergfe@redhat.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] watchdog: don't run proc_watchdog_update if new value is same as old
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 10:28:58 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160315142858.GZ194535@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56E78957.6020707@akamai.com>
On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 11:02:31PM -0500, Josh Hunt wrote:
> On 03/14/2016 11:29 AM, Don Zickus wrote:
> >
> >Hi Josh,
> >
> >I believe Uli thought the below patch might fix it.
> >
> >Cheers,
> >Don
>
> Don
>
> It looks like I was incorrect when I said 4.5 was getting the soft lockup. I
> originally found this problem on 4.1.19 and saw both the problem my patch
> solves and the soft lockups there. I thought when I checked 4.5 that I saw
> both issues there as well, but going back and checking now that is not the
> case. I only see the issue my patch resolves on 4.5.
>
> With that info my changelog is incorrect now as it states I saw a soft
> lockup on the head. I will submit a v2 of my patch with the updated
> changelog. I'll also cc stable this time as I'd like to see this fix end up
> there as well.
>
> As for the soft lockups showing up on 4.1, I tried Uli's patch and it did
> not help. After that I did a git bisect to figure out when the soft lockup
> was fixed and it appears to be resolved after one of the commits in this
> series:
>
> commit 81a4beef91ba4a9e8ad6054ca9933dff7e25ff28
> Author: Ulrich Obergfell <uobergfe@redhat.com>
> Date: Fri Sep 4 15:45:15 2015 -0700
>
> watchdog: introduce watchdog_park_threads() and
> watchdog_unpark_threads()
>
> I didn't identify the exact commit.
>
> It would be nice to resolve the soft lockup for the stable folks since 4.1
> and 4.4 are longterm stable releases and would see this problem.
>
> I did not have time to debug it any more outside of this bisection today. If
> you have something you'd like me to try which may work for the stable
> kernels I'm happy to test it.
>
> For the record I'm able to reproduce the soft lockup on 4.1 doing:
>
> while :; do echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/nmi_watchdog; sleep .1; done & sleep
> 30 && kill %1 && sleep 5
Thanks for the feedback Josh! Good to know the softlockup was fixed
already. :-)
Cheers,
Don
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-15 14:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-12 23:50 [PATCH] watchdog: don't run proc_watchdog_update if new value is same as old Joshua Hunt
2016-03-14 14:34 ` Don Zickus
2016-03-14 14:45 ` Josh Hunt
2016-03-14 16:29 ` Don Zickus
2016-03-15 4:02 ` Josh Hunt
2016-03-15 14:28 ` Don Zickus [this message]
2016-03-16 9:21 ` Ulrich Obergfell
2016-03-17 16:08 ` Josh Hunt
2016-03-18 11:05 ` Ulrich Obergfell
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=20160315142858.GZ194535@redhat.com \
--to=dzickus@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=johunt@akamai.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.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