linux-kernel - Re: [patch 3/4] Locally disable the softlockup watchdog rather than touching it

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 28 Mar 2007 15:50:04 +0200
From:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
To:	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Cc:	Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	virtualization@...ts.osdl.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, John Hawkes <hawkes@....com>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 3/4] Locally disable the softlockup watchdog rather than touching it

On Wednesday 28 March 2007 15:33, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
> 
> Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> >
> > I haven't really worked out how this should interact with the nmi
> > watchdog; touch_nmi_watchdog() still ends up calling
> > touch_softlockup_watchdog(), so there's still some redundancy here.
> >
> >   
> 
> touch_nmi_watchdog is attempting to tickle _all_ CPUs softlockup watchdogs.

It is supposed to only touch the current CPU, just like it only touches
the NMI watchdog on the current CPU.


> 
> Currently, the code is incorrect -- it is calling 
> touch_softlockup_watchdog which touches only the current CPU's 
> softlockup watchdog.

Sounds correct to me.

-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/