All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@chromium.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@chromium.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Marcin Slusarz <marcin.slusarz@gmail.com>,
	Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH 4/4 v2] watchdog: configure nmi watchdog period based on watchdog_thresh
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 20:44:31 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110518034431.GC11023@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110517071642.GF22305@elte.hu>

Ingo Molnar (mingo@elte.hu) wrote:
> 
> * Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@chromium.org> wrote:
> 
> > Before the conversion of the NMI watchdog to perf event, the watchdog
> > timeout was 5 seconds. Now it is 60 seconds. For my particular application,
> > netbooks, 5 seconds was a better timeout. With a short timeout, we
> > catch faults earlier and are able to send back a panic. With a 60 second
> > timeout, the user is unlikely to wait and will instead hit the power
> > button, causing us to lose the panic info.
> 
> That's an interesting observation. Have you been able to measure/observe this 
> effect somehow, or do you presume that users find 60 seconds too long?
> 

Mostly intuition. There is a threshold beyond which the user will hit
the power button. Not sure if its 20 seconds or 20 minutes. My feeling
was that the 1 minute was too long.

For a user experience perspective, a quick reboot also seems like a better
experience than a one minute hang. Our systems boot in 8 seconds and restore
the previous session so a reboot is almost not noticable.

> This would be a concern for upstream as well i guess.
> 
> > This change configures the NMI period based on the watchdog_thresh.
> 
> Hm, our tolerance for the two thresholds is not just human but technical: hard 
> lockup warnings should indeed be triggered after just a few seconds, soft 
> lockups can have false positives under extreme conditions.
> 
> So we generally want a higher threshold for soft lockups than for hard lockups.
> 
> So how about we couple the thresholds with a factor: we make the soft threshold 
> twice the amount of time the hard threshold is? Then we could change the 
> upstream default as well i think: lets change the NMI timeout to 10 seconds 
> (and thus have the soft threshold at 20 seconds). Is 20 seconds short enough 
> for most users to not hit reset?
> 

Agree. Implemented in this version of the patch (v2).

---

Before the conversion of the NMI watchdog to perf event, the watchdog
timeout was 5 seconds. Now it is 60 seconds. For my particular application,
netbooks, 5 seconds was a better timeout. With a short timeout, we
catch faults earlier and are able to send back a panic. With a 60 second
timeout, the user is unlikely to wait and will instead hit the power
button, causing us to lose the panic info.

This change configures the NMI period to watchdog_thresh and sets
the softlockup_thresh to watchdog_thresh * 2. In addition, watchdog_thresh
was reduced to 10 seconds as suggested by Ingo Molnar.

Signed-off-by: Mandeep Singh Baines <msb@chromium.org>
LKML-Reference: <20110517071642.GF22305@elte.hu>
Cc: Marcin Slusarz <marcin.slusarz@gmail.com>
Cc: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
---
 arch/x86/kernel/apic/hw_nmi.c |    4 ++--
 include/linux/nmi.h           |    2 +-
 kernel/watchdog.c             |   19 +++++++++++++++----
 3 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/hw_nmi.c b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/hw_nmi.c
index 5260fe9..d5e57db0 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/apic/hw_nmi.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/apic/hw_nmi.c
@@ -19,9 +19,9 @@
 #include <linux/delay.h>
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_HARDLOCKUP_DETECTOR
-u64 hw_nmi_get_sample_period(void)
+u64 hw_nmi_get_sample_period(int watchdog_thresh)
 {
-	return (u64)(cpu_khz) * 1000 * 60;
+	return (u64)(cpu_khz) * 1000 * watchdog_thresh;
 }
 #endif
 
diff --git a/include/linux/nmi.h b/include/linux/nmi.h
index 10cbca7..a26fb4a 100644
--- a/include/linux/nmi.h
+++ b/include/linux/nmi.h
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ static inline bool trigger_all_cpu_backtrace(void)
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_LOCKUP_DETECTOR
 int hw_nmi_is_cpu_stuck(struct pt_regs *);
-u64 hw_nmi_get_sample_period(void);
+u64 hw_nmi_get_sample_period(int watchdog_thresh);
 extern int watchdog_enabled;
 extern int watchdog_thresh;
 struct ctl_table;
diff --git a/kernel/watchdog.c b/kernel/watchdog.c
index ea3dfc2..2788fa9 100644
--- a/kernel/watchdog.c
+++ b/kernel/watchdog.c
@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@
 #include <linux/perf_event.h>
 
 int watchdog_enabled = 1;
-int __read_mostly watchdog_thresh = 60;
+int __read_mostly watchdog_thresh = 10;
 
 static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, watchdog_touch_ts);
 static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct task_struct *, softlockup_watchdog);
@@ -91,6 +91,17 @@ static int __init nosoftlockup_setup(char *str)
 __setup("nosoftlockup", nosoftlockup_setup);
 /*  */
 
+/*
+ * Hard-lockup warnings should be triggered after just a few seconds. Soft-
+ * lockups can have false positives under extreme conditions. So we generally
+ * want a higher threshold for soft lockups than for hard lockups. So we couple
+ * the thresholds with a factor: we make the soft threshold twice the amount of
+ * time the hard threshold is.
+ */
+static int get_softlockup_thresh()
+{
+	return watchdog_thresh * 2;
+}
 
 /*
  * Returns seconds, approximately.  We don't need nanosecond
@@ -110,7 +121,7 @@ static unsigned long get_sample_period(void)
 	 * increment before the hardlockup detector generates
 	 * a warning
 	 */
-	return watchdog_thresh * (NSEC_PER_SEC / 5);
+	return get_softlockup_thresh() * (NSEC_PER_SEC / 5);
 }
 
 /* Commands for resetting the watchdog */
@@ -182,7 +193,7 @@ static int is_softlockup(unsigned long touch_ts)
 	unsigned long now = get_timestamp(smp_processor_id());
 
 	/* Warn about unreasonable delays: */
-	if (time_after(now, touch_ts + watchdog_thresh))
+	if (time_after(now, touch_ts + get_softlockup_thresh()))
 		return now - touch_ts;
 
 	return 0;
@@ -359,7 +370,7 @@ static int watchdog_nmi_enable(int cpu)
 
 	/* Try to register using hardware perf events */
 	wd_attr = &wd_hw_attr;
-	wd_attr->sample_period = hw_nmi_get_sample_period();
+	wd_attr->sample_period = hw_nmi_get_sample_period(watchdog_thresh);
 	event = perf_event_create_kernel_counter(wd_attr, cpu, NULL, watchdog_overflow_callback);
 	if (!IS_ERR(event)) {
 		printk(KERN_INFO "NMI watchdog enabled, takes one hw-pmu counter.\n");
-- 
1.7.3.1


  parent reply	other threads:[~2011-05-18  3:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-05-16 23:34 [PATCH 1/4] watchdog: fix rounding issues in get_sample_period() Mandeep Singh Baines
2011-05-16 23:34 ` [PATCH 2/4] watchdog: only disable/enable watchdog if neccessary Mandeep Singh Baines
2011-05-16 23:35 ` [PATCH 3/4] watchdog: disable watchdog when thresh is zero Mandeep Singh Baines
2011-05-17  7:10   ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-18  3:36     ` [PATCH 3/4 v2] " Mandeep Singh Baines
2011-05-18  8:35       ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-19 16:20         ` [PATCH 3/4 v3] " Mandeep Singh Baines
2011-05-23 11:13     ` [tip:perf/urgent] watchdog: Disable " tip-bot for Mandeep Singh Baines
2011-05-16 23:35 ` [PATCH 4/4] watchdog: configure nmi watchdog period based on watchdog_thresh Mandeep Singh Baines
2011-05-17  7:16   ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-17 14:03     ` Don Zickus
2011-05-17 18:47       ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-18  3:44     ` Mandeep Singh Baines [this message]
2011-05-18  8:39       ` [PATCH 4/4 v2] " Ingo Molnar
2011-05-18 13:51         ` Don Zickus
2011-05-23 11:13     ` [tip:perf/urgent] watchdog: Change the default timeout and " tip-bot for Mandeep Singh Baines
2011-05-24  3:58     ` [tip:perf/urgent] watchdog: Fix non-standard prototype of get_softlockup_thresh() tip-bot for Ingo Molnar
2011-05-18 13:53 ` [PATCH 1/4] watchdog: fix rounding issues in get_sample_period() Don Zickus
2011-05-19 16:26   ` Mandeep Singh Baines
2011-05-20 11:51     ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-23  5:14       ` Mandeep Singh Baines
2011-06-09 11:47     ` Don Zickus
2011-06-09 14:51       ` Mandeep Singh Baines
2011-05-23  5:10 Mandeep Singh Baines
2011-05-23  5:10 ` [PATCH 2/4] watchdog: only disable/enable watchdog if neccessary Mandeep Singh Baines
2011-05-23 11:12   ` [tip:perf/urgent] watchdog: Only " tip-bot for Mandeep Singh Baines
2011-05-23  5:10 ` [PATCH 3/4] watchdog: disable watchdog when thresh is zero Mandeep Singh Baines
2011-05-23  5:10 ` [PATCH 4/4] watchdog: configure nmi watchdog period based on watchdog_thresh Mandeep Singh Baines
2011-05-23 11:12 ` [tip:perf/urgent] watchdog: Fix rounding bug in get_sample_period() tip-bot for Mandeep Singh Baines
2011-05-24  3:41 linux-next: build warning in Lunus' tree Stephen Rothwell

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20110518034431.GC11023@google.com \
    --to=msb@chromium.org \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dzickus@redhat.com \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=marcin.slusarz@gmail.com \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.