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: <469F77F0.8040407@goop.org>
Date:	Thu, 19 Jul 2007 07:40:48 -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:
>> 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?
>>     
>
> sched_clock(), as its name suggests it, is meant for the scheduler's 
> use. The scheduler generally only needs to measure time when the CPU is 
> busy - not across idle periods. So sched_clock() can (and will) break 
> across certain types of ACPI idle methods.
>   

Doesn't that mean it will mis-measure process idle times?  Is that a
problem?

    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/