From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Carlos Bilbao <bilbao@vt.edu>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
carlos.bilbao@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, seanjc@google.com,
jan.glauber@gmail.com, pmladek@suse.com, jani.nikula@intel.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
takakura@valinux.co.jp, john.ogness@linutronix.de,
x86@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] Reduce CPU consumption after panic
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 00:10:49 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250429221049.GG4439@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <433c6561-353e-4752-b9cf-155e49e62e63@vt.edu>
On Tue, Apr 29, 2025 at 03:32:56PM -0500, Carlos Bilbao wrote:
> Yes, the machine is effectively dead, but as things stand today,
> it's still drawing resources unnecessarily.
>
> Who cares? An example, as mentioned in the cover letter, is Linux running
Ah, see, I didn't have no cover letter, only akpm's reply.
> in VMs. Imagine a scenario where customers are billed based on CPU usage --
> having panicked VMs spinning in useless loops wastes their money. In shared
> envs, those wasted cycles could be used by other processes/VMs. But this
> is as much about the cloud as it is for laptops/embedded/anywhere -- Linux
> should avoid wasting resources wherever possible.
So I don't really buy the laptop and embedded case, people tend to look
at laptops when open, and get very impatient when they don't respond.
Embedded things really should have a watchdog.
Also, should you not be using panic_timeout to auto reboot your machine
in all these cases?
In any case, the VM nonsense, do they not have a virtual watchdog to
'reap' crashed VMs or something?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-29 22:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-29 15:06 [PATCH v3 0/2] Reduce CPU consumption after panic carlos.bilbao
2025-04-29 15:06 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] panic: Allow for dynamic custom behavior " carlos.bilbao
2025-04-29 15:06 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] x86/panic: Add x86_panic_handler as default post-panic behavior carlos.bilbao
2025-04-29 20:39 ` [PATCH v3 0/2] Reduce CPU consumption after panic Andrew Morton
2025-04-29 20:17 ` Carlos Bilbao
2025-04-29 22:53 ` Andrew Morton
2025-04-29 21:39 ` Carlos Bilbao
2025-04-29 21:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-04-29 20:32 ` Carlos Bilbao
2025-04-29 22:10 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2025-04-29 20:52 ` Carlos Bilbao
2025-04-30 8:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-04-30 15:59 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-04-30 18:54 ` Carlos Bilbao
2025-05-01 8:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-05-07 19:49 ` Carlos Bilbao
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=20250429221049.GG4439@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bilbao@vt.edu \
--cc=carlos.bilbao@kernel.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jan.glauber@gmail.com \
--cc=jani.nikula@intel.com \
--cc=john.ogness@linutronix.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pmladek@suse.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=takakura@valinux.co.jp \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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