[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101124140859.GC22165@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 09:08:59 -0500
From: Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>
To: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, fweisbec@...il.com,
gorcunov@...nvz.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] x86, nmi_watchdog: remove the old nmi_watchdog
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 07:23:39PM -0800, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> > - {
> > - .procname = "nmi_watchdog",
> > - .data = &nmi_watchdog_enabled,
> > - .maxlen = sizeof (int),
> > - .mode = 0644,
> > - .proc_handler = proc_nmi_enabled,
> > - },
>
> wonder if you can keep nmi_watchdog in sysctl? So in run-time it could be disabled after it booted up.
Well, with the new code I have watchdog_enabled which does the same thing.
With the nmi watchdog moving to generic code, the idea was to call it a
hardlockup detector. I guess I was trying to rename things to avoid using
nmi all over the place to reflect the idea that a hardlockup might be able
to be used by something other than an nmi.
I can probably wrap this around watchdog_enabled to preserve it I suppose.
Let me know.
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