[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200305075742.GR2596@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2020 08:57:42 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Xi Wang <xii@...gle.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Josh Don <joshdon@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: watchdog: Touch kernel watchdog in sched code
On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 01:39:41PM -0800, Xi Wang wrote:
> The main purpose of kernel watchdog is to test whether scheduler can
> still schedule tasks on a cpu. In order to reduce latency from
> periodically invoking watchdog reset in thread context, we can simply
> touch watchdog from pick_next_task in scheduler. Compared to actually
> resetting watchdog from cpu stop / migration threads, we lose coverage
> on: a migration thread actually get picked and we actually context
> switch to the migration thread. Both steps are heavily protected by
> kernel locks and unlikely to silently fail. Thus the change would
> provide the same level of protection with less overhead.
>
> The new way vs the old way to touch the watchdogs is configurable
> from:
>
> /proc/sys/kernel/watchdog_touch_in_thread_interval
>
> The value means:
> 0: Always touch watchdog from pick_next_task
> 1: Always touch watchdog from migration thread
> N (N>0): Touch watchdog from migration thread once in every N
> invocations, and touch watchdog from pick_next_task for
> other invocations.
>
This is configurable madness. What are we really trying to do here?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists