[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101110160516.GZ4823@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 11:05:16 -0500
From: Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: fweisbec@...il.com, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] watchdog: touch_nmi_watchdog should only touch local
cpu not every one
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 08:49:41AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> > I ran into a scenario where while one cpu was stuck and should have panic'd
> > because of the NMI watchdog, it didn't. The reason was another cpu was spewing
> > stack dumps on to the console. Upon investigation, I noticed that when writing to
> > the console and also when dumping the stack, the watchdog is touched.
> >
> > This causes all the cpus to reset their NMI watchdog flags and the 'stuck' cpu
> > just spins forever.
>
> Hm, the flip side is that if a CPU is stuck spewing backtraces, we will now make all
> the other CPUs a lot more noisy - which might only 'lock up' because this CPU is
> stuck spewing oopses, right?
When you say the other CPUs will be a lot more noisy, is that because they
are busy processing backtraces for the first cpu to spew? I guess I don't
understand how the other CPUs could have their interrupts off the whole
time while the first cpu is spewing a backtrace (just trying to educate
myself).
Cheers,
Don
--
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