linux-kernel - Re: regression from softlockup fix

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: <20071119.031005.127194576.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Mon, 19 Nov 2007 03:10:05 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	mingo@...e.hu
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jeremy@...p.org, gregkh@...e.de,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: regression from softlockup fix

From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 10:43:38 +0100

> * David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> 
> > I suspect that what is happening is that the NOHZ period is longer 
> > than the softlockup timeout (10 seconds) and we get an interrupt 
> > before the watchdog thread gets onto the cpu.
> 
> indeed! Does the patch below do the trick?

I'm sure it works but it partly defeats the purpose of NOHZ.

I really like it that my cpus sleep completely for hours at a time
when not in use. :)

Anyways, I'll give your patch a test.
-
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/