linux-kernel - Re: [patch 1/4] Ignore stolen time in the softlockup watchdog

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]

Message-Id: <20070424105738.e0ce36a9.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Tue, 24 Apr 2007 10:57:38 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	virtualization@...ts.osdl.org, Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>,
	Zachary Amsden <zach@...are.com>,
	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	Dan Hecht <dhecht@...are.com>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
	Chris Lalancette <clalance@...hat.com>,
	Rick Lindsley <ricklind@...ibm.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [patch 1/4] Ignore stolen time in the softlockup watchdog

On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 10:51:35 -0700 Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org> wrote:

> Andrew Morton wrote:
> > It seems fairly sensitive to .config settings.  See
> > http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/config-sony.txt
> >   
> 
> I haven't tried your config yet, but I haven't managed to reproduce it
> by playing with the usual suspects in my config (SMP, PREEMPT).  Any
> idea about which config changes make the difference?

I said that because the damn thing went away when I was hunting it down
because I lost the config and was unable to remember the right combination
of debug settings.  Fortunately it later came back so I took care to
preserve the config.

> Hm, is it caused by using sched_clock() to generate the printk
> timestamps while generating the lock test output?

Conceivably.  What does that locking API test do?

I was using printk timestamps and netconsole at the time.
-
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/