[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150722163553.GA24041@Sligo.logfs.org>
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 09:35:53 -0700
From: Jörn Engel <joern@...estorage.com>
To: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>
Cc: Spencer Baugh <sbaugh@...ern.com>, Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ulrich Obergfell <uobergfe@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Andrew Jones <drjones@...hat.com>,
chai wen <chaiw.fnst@...fujitsu.com>,
Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...hip.com>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Spencer Baugh <Spencer.baugh@...estorage.com>,
Joern Engel <joern@...fs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] soft lockup: kill realtime threads before panic
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 09:35:28AM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-07-21 at 23:33 -0700, Jörn Engel wrote:
>
> > One could argue that killing the realtime thread is even better than
> > panic, as things can restart with a blank slate even faster. But the
> > real benefit is that we get better debug data for the failing component.
> > If we had a kernel bug, the backtrace would usually be sufficient to
> > point fingers. With a bonkers realtime thread, not so much.
>
> If userspace wants a watchdog, it should train a userspace dog, not turn
> the kernel watchdog into a userspace attack dog.
Fair point. Let's drop this patch then.
Jörn
--
Money can buy bandwidth, but latency is forever.
-- John R. Mashey
--
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