[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87od5ms7yh.fsf@skyscraper.fehenstaub.lan>
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 02:45:42 +0200
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...urebad.de>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] softlockup: fix watchdog task wakeup frequency
Hi,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...urebad.de> writes:
> From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...urebad.de>
> Subject: [PATCH 3/3] softlockup: wake up watchdog twice per threshold timespan
>
> Updating the timestamp more often is pointless as we print the warnings
> only if we exceed the threshold. And the check for hung tasks relies on
> the last timestamp, so it will keep working correctly, too.
>
> Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...urebad.de>
> ---
> kernel/softlockup.c | 7 +++++--
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/kernel/softlockup.c
> +++ b/kernel/softlockup.c
> @@ -107,8 +107,11 @@ void softlockup_tick(void)
>
> now = get_timestamp(this_cpu);
>
> - /* Wake up the high-prio watchdog task every second: */
> - if (now > (touch_timestamp + 1))
> + /*
> + * Wake up the high-prio watchdog task twice per
> + * threshold timespan.
> + */
> + if (now > touch_timestamp + softlockup_thresh/2)
> wake_up_process(per_cpu(watchdog_task, this_cpu));
That defeats patch 1/3 and I think it can be dropped (#1).
Hannes
--
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