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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 10:47:48 -0500 From: Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com> To: TAO HU <tghk48@...orola.com> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> Subject: Re: In many cases softlockup can not be reported after disabling IRQ for long time On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 03:28:09PM +0800, TAO HU wrote: > Resend with a new subject > > On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 4:24 PM, TAO HU <tghk48@...orola.com> wrote: > > Hi, All > > > > While playing kernel 3.0.8 with below test code, it does NOT report > > any softlockup with 60%~70% chances. > > NOTE: the softlockup timeout is set to 10 seconds (i.e. > > watchdog_thresh=5) in my test. > > ... ... > > preempt_disable(); > > local_irq_disable(); > > for (i = 0; i < 20; i++) > > mdelay(1000); > > local_irq_enable(); > > preempt_enable(); > > ... ... > > > > However, if I remove local_irq_disable()/local_irq_enable() it will > > report softlockup with no problem. > > I believe it is due to that after local_irq_enable() > > touch_softlockup_watchdog() is called prior softlockup timer. Hi Hu, Honestly, you should be getting hardlockup warnings if you are disabling interrupts. Do you see anything in the console output? 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