linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Clean up watchdog handlers

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]

Message-ID: <16049ab0-e309-8ea7-81d4-a855c666037a@oracle.com>
Date:   Mon, 31 Oct 2016 16:30:59 -0500
From:   Babu Moger <babu.moger@...cle.com>
To:     Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.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, bp@...e.de,
        bywxiaobai@....com, cmetcalf@...lanox.com, keescook@...omium.org,
        ebiederm@...ssion.com, huawei.libin@...wei.com,
        ralf@...ux-mips.org, dvyukov@...gle.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, sam@...nborg.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Clean up watchdog handlers


On 10/31/2016 4:00 PM, Don Zickus wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 09:02:19AM -0700, Babu Moger wrote:
>> This is an attempt to cleanup watchdog handlers. Right now,
>> kernel/watchdog.c implements both softlockup and hardlockup detectors.
>> Softlockup code is generic. Hardlockup code is arch specific. Some
>> architectures don't use hardlockup detectors. They use their own watchdog
>> detectors. To make both these combination work, we have numerous #ifdefs
>> in kernel/watchdog.c.
>>
>> We are trying here to make these handlers independent of each other.
>> Also provide an interface for architectures to implement their own
>> handlers. watchdog_nmi_enable and watchdog_nmi_disable will be defined
>> as weak such that architectures can override its definitions.
>>
>> Thanks to Don Zickus for his suggestions.
>> Here is the previous discussion
>> http://www.spinics.net/lists/sparclinux/msg16441.html
> Hi Babu,
>
> I finally got some cycles to poke at this today.  Good work.  A couple of
> suggestions.  For bisectability, I am thinking patch2 should be first and
> patch1 and patch3 should be combined.  Also watchdog_hld.c is going to need
> up top:
>
> #define pr_fmt(fmt) "NMI watchdog: " fmt
>
> otherwise the error messages miss the header.
>
> Though I don't think watchdog.c and watchdog_hld.c should have the same
> header.  A good solution isn't coming to me right now.  I will try to run
> some tests on this tomorrow.
Don, Thanks for the feedback. Let me know if you run into problems with 
your tests.
I will start working on the comments.
Thanks
Babu

>
> Cheers,
> Don
>
>> Babu Moger (4):
>>    watchdog: Remove hardlockup handler references
>>    watchdog: Move shared definitions to nmi.h
>>    watchdog: Move hardlockup detector in separate file
>>    sparc: Implement watchdog_nmi_enable and watchdog_nmi_disable
>>
>>   arch/sparc/kernel/nmi.c |   44 ++++++++-
>>   include/linux/nmi.h     |   19 ++++
>>   kernel/Makefile         |    1 +
>>   kernel/watchdog.c       |  276 ++---------------------------------------------
>>   kernel/watchdog_hld.c   |  238 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   5 files changed, 312 insertions(+), 266 deletions(-)
>>   create mode 100644 kernel/watchdog_hld.c
>>