[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130110142245.GE19944@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 14:22:45 +0000
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
To: Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>
Cc: Colin Cross <ccross@...roid.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
liu chuansheng <chuansheng.liu@...el.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] hardlockup: detect hard lockups without NMIs using
secondary cpus
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 09:02:15AM -0500, Don Zickus wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 05:57:39PM -0800, Colin Cross wrote:
> > Emulate NMIs on systems where they are not available by using timer
> > interrupts on other cpus. Each cpu will use its softlockup hrtimer
> > to check that the next cpu is processing hrtimer interrupts by
> > verifying that a counter is increasing.
> >
> > This patch is useful on systems where the hardlockup detector is not
> > available due to a lack of NMIs, for example most ARM SoCs.
>
> I have seen other cpus, like Sparc I think, create a 'virtual NMI' by
> reserving an IRQ line as 'special' (can not be masked). Not sure if that
> is something worth looking at here (or even possible).
No it isn't, because that assumes that things like spin_lock_irqsave()
won't mask that interrupt. We don't have the facility to do that.
--
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