[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100901163632.GA6506@lenovo>
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2010 20:36:32 +0400
From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
To: Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, peterz@...radead.org,
fweisbec@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] [lockup detector] sync touch_*_watchdog back to
old semantics
On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 11:51:12AM -0400, Don Zickus wrote:
> Top posting because droid won't let me bottom post
>
> This patch was the result of a regression with acpi and preempt.
> Akpm asked that I not change the semantics of the old touch_nmi_watchdog.
> So I tried to revert to the old behaviour.
>
> Sorry for not properly explaining that.
>
yup, stareing at old behaviour I think there is a place where we could
get rid of traversing all cpus: native_cpu_up() -- I don't get the reason why
watchdog counter should be reset on every other cpu as well. Perhaps
I miss something. On the other hands I think changing behaviour of
touch_nmi_watchdog just for one entry might not be worth thing to do :)
> Cheers,
> Don
>
> Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
>
...
> >Ok - can you cite the old watchdog code, did it really do a nr_cpus
> >loop?
> >
> >Thanks,
> >
> > Ingo
-- Cyrill
--
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