linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 06/10] watchdog/buddy: Cleanup how watchdog_buddy_check

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: <ZHYOmkZBxd4TiTv-@alley>
Date:   Tue, 30 May 2023 16:56:26 +0200
From:   Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
To:     Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        kgdb-bugreport@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
        sparclinux@...r.kernel.org,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/10] watchdog/buddy: Cleanup how
 watchdog_buddy_check_hardlockup() is called

On Fri 2023-05-26 18:41:36, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> In the patch ("watchdog/hardlockup: detect hard lockups using
> secondary (buddy) CPUs"), we added a call from the common watchdog.c
> file into the buddy. That call could be done more cleanly.
> Specifically:
> 1. If we move the call into watchdog_hardlockup_kick() then it keeps
>    watchdog_timer_fn() simpler.
> 2. We don't need to pass an "unsigned long" to the buddy for the timer
>    count. In the patch ("watchdog/hardlockup: add a "cpu" param to
>    watchdog_hardlockup_check()") the count was changed to "atomic_t"
>    which is backed by an int, so we should match types.
> 
> Suggested-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
> Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>


The change looks fine:

Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>

That said, I would prefer to squash it into the patch ("watchdog/hardlockup:
detect hard lockups using secondary (buddy) CPUs"). It would remove
some back and forth churn in the git history. But it is up to Andrew.

Best Regards,
Petr