[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161017142501.GJ98438@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 10:25:01 -0400
From: Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>
To: Babu Moger <babu.moger@...cle.com>
Cc: mingo@...nel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, ak@...ux.intel.com,
jkosina@...e.cz, baiyaowei@...s.chinamobile.com,
atomlin@...hat.com, uobergfe@...hat.com, tj@...nel.org,
hidehiro.kawai.ez@...achi.com, johunt@...mai.com,
davem@...emloft.net, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, sam@...nborg.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Introduce arch specific nmi enable, disable
handlers
On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 01:38:00PM -0700, Babu Moger wrote:
> During our testing we noticed that nmi watchdogs in sparc could not be disabled or
> enabled dynamically using sysctl/proc interface. Sparc uses its own arch specific
> nmi watchdogs. There is a sysctl and proc interface(proc/sys/kernel/nmi_watchdog)
> to enable/disable nmi watchdogs. However, that is not working for sparc. There
> is no interface to feed this parameter to arch specific nmi watchdogs.
>
> These patches extend the same sysctl/proc interface to enable or disable
> these arch specific nmi watchdogs dynamically. Introduced new functions
> arch_watchdog_nmi_enable and arch_watchdog_nmi_disable which can be implemented
> in arch specific handlers.
> If you think there is a better way to do this. Please advice.
>
> Tested on sparc. Compile tested on x86.
Thanks Babu! Looking through the code it seems appropriate with what I
suggested. I am running it through my testsuite and things are failing.
But it is most likely my system is misconfigured. Give me another day or so
to straighten that out.
Cheers,
Don
>
> v2:
> a)Sam Ravnborg's comments about making the definitions visible.
> With the new approach we dont need those definitions((NMI_WATCHDOG_ENABLED,
> SOFT_WATCHDOG_ENABLED etc..) outside watchdog.c. So no action.
>
> b) Made changes per Don Zickus comments.
> Don, I could not use your patches as is. Reason is sparc does not define
> CONFIG_HARDLOCKUP_DETECTOR. So, defining default __weak function did not
> work for me. However, I have used your idea to define __weak functions
> arch_watchdog_nmi_enable and arch_watchdog_nmi_disable when CONFIG_HARDLOCKUP_DETECTOR
> is not defined. I feel this should have very less impact on the races you are
> concerned about. Please take a look. Feel free to suggest.
>
> Patch2 changes: I had to introduce new variable nmi_init_done to synchronize
> watchdog thread and kernel init thread.
>
> v1:
> Initial version. Discussion thread here
> http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1245427.html
>
> Babu Moger (2):
> watchdog: Introduce arch_watchdog_nmi_enable and
> arch_watchdog_nmi_disable
> sparc: Implement arch_watchdog_nmi_enable and
> arch_watchdog_nmi_disable
>
> arch/sparc/kernel/nmi.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> kernel/watchdog.c | 65 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
> 2 files changed, 84 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists