[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <460A74EF.6000700@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 10:00:15 -0400
From: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
CC: virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
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
>> 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.
>
>
Andi,
(sorry for the cut-and-paste).
touch_nmi_watchdogs sets EACH CPUs alert_counter to 0.
void touch_nmi_watchdog (void)
{
if (nmi_watchdog > 0) {
unsigned cpu;
/*
* Just reset the alert counters, (other CPUs might be
* spinning on locks we hold):
*/
for_each_present_cpu (cpu)
alert_counter[cpu] = 0;
}
/*
* Tickle the softlockup detector too:
*/
touch_softlockup_watchdog();
}
The call to touch_softlockup_watchdog here is incorrect -- it is only
touching the current CPU's softlockup.
P.
-
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