[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200611152023.53960.ak@suse.de>
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 20:23:53 +0100
From: Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, discuss@...-64.org,
William Cohen <wcohen@...hat.com>,
Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>,
Komuro <komurojun-mbn@...ty.com>,
Ernst Herzberg <earny@...4u.de>,
Andre Noll <maan@...temlinux.org>,
oprofile-list@...ts.sourceforge.net,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
linux-usb-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, phil.el@...adoo.fr,
Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
linux-pci@...ey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...l.org>,
Prakash Punnoor <prakash@...noor.de>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
Alex Romosan <romosan@...orax.lbl.gov>, gregkh@...e.de,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Andrey Borzenkov <arvidjaar@...l.ru>
Subject: Re: [discuss] Re: 2.6.19-rc5: known regressions (v3)
> The fact is, it used to work, and the kernel changed interfaces, so now it
> doesn't.
No, it didn't work. oprofile may have done something, but it
just silently killed the NMI watchdog in the process.
That was never acceptable.
Now we do proper accounting of NMI sources and also proper allocation
of performance counters.
> Yes, "oprofile" should be fixed to not depend on that, but the kernel
> shouldn't change the interfaces, and we should add back the zero entry.
That would break the nmi watchdog again.
Anyways, there is a sysctl to disable the nmi watchdog if someone
is desperate.
But I think it is clearly oprofile who did wrong here and needs
to be fixed.
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists