All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
To: Babu Moger <babu.moger@oracle.com>
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, ak@linux.intel.com,
	jkosina@suse.cz, baiyaowei@cmss.chinamobile.com,
	atomlin@redhat.com, uobergfe@redhat.com, tj@kernel.org,
	hidehiro.kawai.ez@hitachi.com, johunt@akamai.com,
	davem@davemloft.net, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, bp@suse.de,
	bywxiaobai@163.com, cmetcalf@mellanox.com, keescook@chromium.org,
	ebiederm@xmission.com, huawei.libin@huawei.com,
	ralf@linux-mips.org, dvyukov@google.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sam@ravnborg.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Clean up watchdog handlers
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2016 09:20:11 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161101132011.GW35881@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <16049ab0-e309-8ea7-81d4-a855c666037a@oracle.com>

On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 04:30:59PM -0500, Babu Moger wrote:
> 
> On 10/31/2016 4:00 PM, Don Zickus wrote:
> >On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 09:02:19AM -0700, Babu Moger wrote:
> >>This is an attempt to cleanup watchdog handlers. Right now,
> >>kernel/watchdog.c implements both softlockup and hardlockup detectors.
> >>Softlockup code is generic. Hardlockup code is arch specific. Some
> >>architectures don't use hardlockup detectors. They use their own watchdog
> >>detectors. To make both these combination work, we have numerous #ifdefs
> >>in kernel/watchdog.c.
> >>
> >>We are trying here to make these handlers independent of each other.
> >>Also provide an interface for architectures to implement their own
> >>handlers. watchdog_nmi_enable and watchdog_nmi_disable will be defined
> >>as weak such that architectures can override its definitions.
> >>
> >>Thanks to Don Zickus for his suggestions.
> >>Here is the previous discussion
> >>http://www.spinics.net/lists/sparclinux/msg16441.html
> >Hi Babu,
> >
> >I finally got some cycles to poke at this today.  Good work.  A couple of
> >suggestions.  For bisectability, I am thinking patch2 should be first and
> >patch1 and patch3 should be combined.  Also watchdog_hld.c is going to need
> >up top:
> >
> >#define pr_fmt(fmt) "NMI watchdog: " fmt
> >
> >otherwise the error messages miss the header.
> >
> >Though I don't think watchdog.c and watchdog_hld.c should have the same
> >header.  A good solution isn't coming to me right now.  I will try to run
> >some tests on this tomorrow.
> Don, Thanks for the feedback. Let me know if you run into problems with your
> tests.

Hi Babu,

My tests passed.  I just have to tweak the expected output lines as they
constantly change. :-(

I am going to play with different config options to see if things break from
a compile perspective.

> I will start working on the comments.

Great.

Cheers,
Don

> Thanks
> Babu
> 
> >
> >Cheers,
> >Don
> >
> >>Babu Moger (4):
> >>   watchdog: Remove hardlockup handler references
> >>   watchdog: Move shared definitions to nmi.h
> >>   watchdog: Move hardlockup detector in separate file
> >>   sparc: Implement watchdog_nmi_enable and watchdog_nmi_disable
> >>
> >>  arch/sparc/kernel/nmi.c |   44 ++++++++-
> >>  include/linux/nmi.h     |   19 ++++
> >>  kernel/Makefile         |    1 +
> >>  kernel/watchdog.c       |  276 ++---------------------------------------------
> >>  kernel/watchdog_hld.c   |  238 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>  5 files changed, 312 insertions(+), 266 deletions(-)
> >>  create mode 100644 kernel/watchdog_hld.c
> >>
> 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
To: Babu Moger <babu.moger@oracle.com>
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, ak@linux.intel.com,
	jkosina@suse.cz, baiyaowei@cmss.chinamobile.com,
	atomlin@redhat.com, uobergfe@redhat.com, tj@kernel.org,
	hidehiro.kawai.ez@hitachi.com, johunt@akamai.com,
	davem@davemloft.net, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, bp@suse.de,
	bywxiaobai@163.com, cmetcalf@mellanox.com, keescook@chromium.org,
	ebiederm@xmission.com, huawei.libin@huawei.com,
	ralf@linux-mips.org, dvyukov@google.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sam@ravnborg.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] Clean up watchdog handlers
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2016 13:20:11 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161101132011.GW35881@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <16049ab0-e309-8ea7-81d4-a855c666037a@oracle.com>

On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 04:30:59PM -0500, Babu Moger wrote:
> 
> On 10/31/2016 4:00 PM, Don Zickus wrote:
> >On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 09:02:19AM -0700, Babu Moger wrote:
> >>This is an attempt to cleanup watchdog handlers. Right now,
> >>kernel/watchdog.c implements both softlockup and hardlockup detectors.
> >>Softlockup code is generic. Hardlockup code is arch specific. Some
> >>architectures don't use hardlockup detectors. They use their own watchdog
> >>detectors. To make both these combination work, we have numerous #ifdefs
> >>in kernel/watchdog.c.
> >>
> >>We are trying here to make these handlers independent of each other.
> >>Also provide an interface for architectures to implement their own
> >>handlers. watchdog_nmi_enable and watchdog_nmi_disable will be defined
> >>as weak such that architectures can override its definitions.
> >>
> >>Thanks to Don Zickus for his suggestions.
> >>Here is the previous discussion
> >>http://www.spinics.net/lists/sparclinux/msg16441.html
> >Hi Babu,
> >
> >I finally got some cycles to poke at this today.  Good work.  A couple of
> >suggestions.  For bisectability, I am thinking patch2 should be first and
> >patch1 and patch3 should be combined.  Also watchdog_hld.c is going to need
> >up top:
> >
> >#define pr_fmt(fmt) "NMI watchdog: " fmt
> >
> >otherwise the error messages miss the header.
> >
> >Though I don't think watchdog.c and watchdog_hld.c should have the same
> >header.  A good solution isn't coming to me right now.  I will try to run
> >some tests on this tomorrow.
> Don, Thanks for the feedback. Let me know if you run into problems with your
> tests.

Hi Babu,

My tests passed.  I just have to tweak the expected output lines as they
constantly change. :-(

I am going to play with different config options to see if things break from
a compile perspective.

> I will start working on the comments.

Great.

Cheers,
Don

> Thanks
> Babu
> 
> >
> >Cheers,
> >Don
> >
> >>Babu Moger (4):
> >>   watchdog: Remove hardlockup handler references
> >>   watchdog: Move shared definitions to nmi.h
> >>   watchdog: Move hardlockup detector in separate file
> >>   sparc: Implement watchdog_nmi_enable and watchdog_nmi_disable
> >>
> >>  arch/sparc/kernel/nmi.c |   44 ++++++++-
> >>  include/linux/nmi.h     |   19 ++++
> >>  kernel/Makefile         |    1 +
> >>  kernel/watchdog.c       |  276 ++---------------------------------------------
> >>  kernel/watchdog_hld.c   |  238 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>  5 files changed, 312 insertions(+), 266 deletions(-)
> >>  create mode 100644 kernel/watchdog_hld.c
> >>
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2016-11-01 13:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-10-26 16:02 [RFC PATCH 0/4] Clean up watchdog handlers Babu Moger
2016-10-26 16:02 ` Babu Moger
2016-10-26 16:02 ` [RFC PATCH 1/4] watchdog: Remove hardlockup handler references Babu Moger
2016-10-26 16:02   ` Babu Moger
2016-10-26 16:02 ` [RFC PATCH 2/4] watchdog: Move shared definitions to nmi.h Babu Moger
2016-10-26 16:02   ` Babu Moger
2016-10-26 16:02 ` [RFC PATCH 3/4] watchdog: Move hardlockup detector to separate file Babu Moger
2016-10-26 16:02   ` Babu Moger
2016-10-26 16:02 ` [RFC PATCH 4/4] sparc: Implement watchdog_nmi_enable and watchdog_nmi_disable Babu Moger
2016-10-26 16:02   ` Babu Moger
2016-10-27 14:13 ` [RFC PATCH 0/4] Clean up watchdog handlers Don Zickus
2016-10-27 14:13   ` Don Zickus
2016-10-31 21:00 ` Don Zickus
2016-10-31 21:00   ` Don Zickus
2016-10-31 21:26   ` Babu Moger
2016-10-31 21:26     ` Babu Moger
2016-10-31 21:30   ` Babu Moger
2016-10-31 21:30     ` Babu Moger
2016-11-01 13:20     ` Don Zickus [this message]
2016-11-01 13:20       ` Don Zickus
2016-11-01 14:58       ` Babu Moger
2016-11-01 14:58         ` Babu Moger

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=20161101132011.GW35881@redhat.com \
    --to=dzickus@redhat.com \
    --cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=atomlin@redhat.com \
    --cc=babu.moger@oracle.com \
    --cc=baiyaowei@cmss.chinamobile.com \
    --cc=bp@suse.de \
    --cc=bywxiaobai@163.com \
    --cc=cmetcalf@mellanox.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dvyukov@google.com \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=hidehiro.kawai.ez@hitachi.com \
    --cc=huawei.libin@huawei.com \
    --cc=jkosina@suse.cz \
    --cc=johunt@akamai.com \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=ralf@linux-mips.org \
    --cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
    --cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=uobergfe@redhat.com \
    /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.