linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] watchdog: introduce watchdog_suspend() and watchdog

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 1 Aug 2015 07:47:52 -0700
From:	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:	Ulrich Obergfell <uobergfe@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	dzickus@...hat.com, atomlin@...hat.com, jolsa@...nel.org,
	mhocko@...e.cz, eranian@...gle.com, cmetcalf@...hip.com,
	fweisbec@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] watchdog: introduce watchdog_suspend() and
 watchdog_resume()

On Sat, Aug 01, 2015 at 10:39:22AM -0400, Ulrich Obergfell wrote:
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Guenter Roeck" <linux@...ck-us.net>
> > ...
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] watchdog: introduce watchdog_suspend() and watchdog_resume()
> >
> > On Sat, Aug 01, 2015 at 02:49:23PM +0200, Ulrich Obergfell wrote:
> >> This interface can be utilized to deactivate the hard and soft lockup
> >> detector temporarily. Callers are expected to minimize the duration of
> >> deactivation. Multiple deactivations are allowed to occur in parallel
> >> but should be rare in practice.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Ulrich Obergfell <uobergfe@...hat.com>
> >> ---
> >>  include/linux/nmi.h |  2 ++
> >>  kernel/watchdog.c   | 65 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>  2 files changed, 67 insertions(+)
> >> 
> >> diff --git a/include/linux/nmi.h b/include/linux/nmi.h
> >> index f94da0e..60050c2 100644
> >> --- a/include/linux/nmi.h
> >> +++ b/include/linux/nmi.h
> >> @@ -80,6 +80,8 @@ extern int proc_watchdog_thresh(struct ctl_table *, int ,
> >>  				void __user *, size_t *, loff_t *);
> >>  extern int proc_watchdog_cpumask(struct ctl_table *, int,
> >>  				 void __user *, size_t *, loff_t *);
> >> +extern int watchdog_suspend(void);
> >> +extern void watchdog_resume(void);
> >
> > How about nmi_watchdog_enable() and nmi_watchdog_disable() to avoid confusion
> > with the watchdog subsystem ?
> 
> Guenter,
> 
> Good point. However, I would like to avoid the 'nmi_' prefix in the
> function names as it could be misleading. watchdog_{suspend|resume}
> affect both -the hard and soft lockup detector- so I think function
> names like
> 
>   lockup_detector_suspend()  instead of watchdog_suspend()
>   lockup_detector_resume()   instead of watchdog_resume()
> 
> would summarize better what these functions are intended to be used
> for. The above names would also be consistent with the existing name
>  
>   lockup_detector_init()
> 
Makes sense.

Thanks,
Guenter
--
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/