From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8566C433ED for ; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 21:09:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 742D7613FF for ; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 21:09:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S238967AbhD0VKf (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Apr 2021 17:10:35 -0400 Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([193.142.43.55]:43742 "EHLO galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S236965AbhD0VKe (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Apr 2021 17:10:34 -0400 From: Thomas Gleixner DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1619557790; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to; bh=lZmVNGp/sO52Y8pqU/C06FwXzAgga9JldSyLl4UxiD4=; b=IxDBWyLIASiHY5zARu6g2QZBv/1xWQjlIp5Kgk762DAkRFLTrJpn24SQ99aNwzNyrSduWC WhtLSnWz7eN18Tcli7IJqhv6kb36yPncKFRPPxUlhsqeQtUFbhOOFaCctZWiDgpU9RezHU eHRwoA727e7ok9pzd8qd8qrzDAFb9l0XxF3aV9SI+xLg8ssz7rFOJ4qh6QS2sUIuKnU0Z1 ZfWecTJDo0fs2NH+aPXQW8Z4Rtn6hMUU1H3VsOAmzmUTJwjt5RmKKzZ7DzchvE6iHBF9Ty AA3HS15oIxcUzJc+I22aKOXEQZGzQkx33ClCub6m1eqYHk+XlTw9YJHH9LqbWA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1619557790; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to; bh=lZmVNGp/sO52Y8pqU/C06FwXzAgga9JldSyLl4UxiD4=; b=35GmVG3ps9sSNRPpxRWcToosqXrH6i+ji7ZNIJuuRqi4U/8WhMVkvQCFcOZBW904CUWq56 fdIpibTQDuO2JXCQ== To: paulmck@kernel.org, Feng Tang Cc: kernel test robot , 0day robot , John Stultz , Stephen Boyd , Jonathan Corbet , Mark Rutland , Marc Zyngier , Andi Kleen , Xing Zhengjun , LKML , lkp@lists.01.org, kernel-team@fb.com, neeraju@codeaurora.org, zhengjun.xing@intel.com Subject: Re: [clocksource] 8c30ace35d: WARNING:at_kernel/time/clocksource.c:#clocksource_watchdog In-Reply-To: <20210427175027.GA945820@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1> Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 23:09:49 +0200 Message-ID: <87y2d3mo2q.ffs@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Paul, On Tue, Apr 27 2021 at 10:50, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 06:37:46AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: >> I suppose that I give it (say) 120 seconds instead of the current 60, >> which might be the right thing to do, but it does feel like papering >> over a very real initramfs problem. Alternatively, I could provide a >> boot parameter allowing those with slow systems to adjust as needed. > > OK, it turns out that there are systems for which boot times in excess > of one minute are expected behavior. They are a bit rare, though. > So what I will do is keep the 60-second default, add a boot parameter, > and also add a comment by the warning pointing out the boot parameter. Oh, no. This starts to become yet another duct tape horror show. I'm not at all against a more robust and resilent watchdog mechanism, but having a dozen knobs to tune and heuristics which are doomed to fail is not a solution at all. Thanks, tglx