login
Header Space

 
 

Re: nmi_watchdog fix for x86_64 to be more like i386

Score:
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...>, David Bahi <dbahi@...>, LKML <linux-kernel@...>, <linux-rt-users@...>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...>, Gregory Haskins <GHaskins@...>
Date: Tuesday, October 2, 2007 - 1:51 am

> Agreed.

Hmm, in lowestpriority mode it would be possible that the APIC changes
the CPU to #1 once; but IRQ 0 is always set to fixed mode. Also even 
if that happens you should have them all on 1.

Maybe the chipset is just ignoring the IO-APIC configuration in this case?

Is it always the same chipset? Is it seen on i386 too?

The problem is really that if this happens it's more than the NMI watchdog
that is broken. If you don't run an additional APIC timer interrupt on CPU #0
it's possible that CPU #0 won't schedule at all.

The only workaround for chipsets ignoring IRQ affinity would be to keep
track on which CPU irq 0 happens and then restart APIC timer interrupts
on the others (or send IPIs) as needed. But that would be fairly ugly.

IRQ 0 is unfortunately an generally under-validated area because Windows doesn't
use it.

-Andi

-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
nmi_watchdog fix for x86_64 to be more like i386, David Bahi, (Wed Sep 26, 2:03 pm)
Re: nmi_watchdog fix for x86_64 to be more like i386, Thomas Gleixner, (Mon Oct 1, 2:54 pm)
Re: nmi_watchdog fix for x86_64 to be more like i386, Thomas Gleixner, (Mon Oct 1, 3:27 pm)
Re: nmi_watchdog fix for x86_64 to be more like i386, Arjan van de Ven, (Mon Oct 1, 3:56 pm)
Re: nmi_watchdog fix for x86_64 to be more like i386, Thomas Gleixner, (Mon Oct 1, 5:17 pm)
Re: nmi_watchdog fix for x86_64 to be more like i386, Thomas Gleixner, (Mon Oct 1, 5:58 pm)
Re: nmi_watchdog fix for x86_64 to be more like i386, Thomas Gleixner, (Mon Oct 1, 6:47 pm)
Re: nmi_watchdog fix for x86_64 to be more like i386, Andi Kleen, (Tue Oct 2, 1:51 am)
Re: nmi_watchdog fix for x86_64 to be more like i386, Thomas Gleixner, (Tue Oct 2, 2:18 am)
RE: nmi_watchdog fix for x86_64 to be more like i386, Pallipadi, Venkatesh, (Fri Oct 5, 12:37 am)
RE: nmi_watchdog fix for x86_64 to be more like i386, Thomas Gleixner, (Fri Oct 5, 4:37 pm)
Re: nmi_watchdog fix for x86_64 to be more like i386, Mika Penttilä, (Tue Oct 2, 12:56 am)
Re: nmi_watchdog fix for x86_64 to be more like i386, Arjan van de Ven, (Tue Oct 2, 1:00 am)
Re: nmi_watchdog fix for x86_64 to be more like i386, Arjan van de Ven, (Mon Oct 1, 6:52 pm)
Re: nmi_watchdog fix for x86_64 to be more like i386, Paul E. McKenney, (Mon Oct 1, 4:11 pm)
speck-geostationary