Re: [PATCH v2] [watchdog] combine nmi_watchdog and softlockup

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Don Zickus
Date: Friday, April 16, 2010 - 9:14 am

On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 05:32:12PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:

Let me re-explain what I meant.  It was meant to do double duty.  The
softlockup code only checks the SOFTLOCKUP bit and the hardlockup only
ever checks the HARDLOCKUP bit.

ie if get_cpu_var(watchdog_warn) && HARDLOCKUP { return; }


Well depends on your POV.  In RHEL we enable both NMI_WATCHDOG and
SOFTLOCKUP on production systems (and we have customers that are
thankful for that :-) ).

Cheers,
Don
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [PATCH v2] [watchdog] combine nmi_watchdog and softlockup, Frederic Weisbecker, (Thu Apr 15, 6:47 pm)
Re: [PATCH v2] [watchdog] combine nmi_watchdog and softlockup, Frederic Weisbecker, (Fri Apr 16, 7:43 am)
Re: [PATCH v2] [watchdog] combine nmi_watchdog and softlockup, Frederic Weisbecker, (Fri Apr 16, 7:46 am)
Re: [PATCH v2] [watchdog] combine nmi_watchdog and softlockup, Frederic Weisbecker, (Fri Apr 16, 7:59 am)
Re: [PATCH v2] [watchdog] combine nmi_watchdog and softlockup, Frederic Weisbecker, (Fri Apr 16, 8:32 am)
Re: [PATCH v2] [watchdog] combine nmi_watchdog and softlockup, Don Zickus, (Fri Apr 16, 9:14 am)
Re: [PATCH v2] [watchdog] combine nmi_watchdog and softlockup, Frederic Weisbecker, (Fri Apr 16, 9:24 am)