linux-kernel - Re: [patch] fix the softlockup watchdog to actually work

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: <469F75AF.5080000@goop.org>
Date:	Thu, 19 Jul 2007 07:31:11 -0700
From:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	stable@...nel.org, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] fix the softlockup watchdog to actually work

Ingo Molnar wrote:
> btw., could you apply the patch below as well? Maybe sched_clock() is 
> misbehaving on your box? (with this i have 5 softlockup patches in my 
> tree - and they are working fine so far.)
>
> 	Ingo
>
> ---------------->
> Subject: [patch] softlockup: use a reliable global time source
> From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
>
> using sched_clock() for the soft-lockups was a bad idea, sched_clock()
> is not a reliable global time-source.
>   

How reliable does it need to be?  All we need is to measure "about 10
seconds"; if we can't get that out of it, how can it be good for
anything else?

    J
-
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/