From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1031689AbbD2Itp (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Apr 2015 04:49:45 -0400 Received: from mx5-phx2.redhat.com ([209.132.183.37]:36004 "EHLO mx5-phx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1031365AbbD2Itl (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Apr 2015 04:49:41 -0400 Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2015 04:48:45 -0400 (EDT) From: Ulrich Obergfell To: Chris Metcalf Cc: Frederic Weisbecker , Don Zickus , Ingo Molnar , Andrew Morton , Andrew Jones , chai wen , Fabian Frederick , Aaron Tomlin , Ben Zhang , Christoph Lameter , Gilad Ben-Yossef , Steven Rostedt , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , Peter Zijlstra Message-ID: <924923093.9035207.1430297325673.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <553FC8DF.7030101@ezchip.com> References: <20150413215423.GA6121@lerouge> <1429040253-7054-1-git-send-email-cmetcalf@ezchip.com> <1429040253-7054-2-git-send-email-cmetcalf@ezchip.com> <755157528.1109591.1429181212104.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <5531299C.60600@ezchip.com> <2132240307.4651379.1429690855807.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <553FC8DF.7030101@ezchip.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/3] watchdog: add watchdog_cpumask sysctl to assist nohz MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.36.7.160] X-Mailer: Zimbra 8.0.6_GA_5922 (ZimbraWebClient - FF22 (Linux)/8.0.6_GA_5922) Thread-Topic: watchdog: add watchdog_cpumask sysctl to assist nohz Thread-Index: UFXEBx9W2+YbkNCeHlOl6GYQafnugg== Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Metcalf" [...] > On 04/22/2015 04:20 AM, Ulrich Obergfell wrote: >> Chris, >> >> in principle the change looks o.k. to me, even though I'm not really familiar >> with the watchdog_nmi_disable_all() and watchdog_nmi_enable_all() functions. >> It is my understanding that those functions are only called once via 'initcall' >> early during kernel startup as shown in the following flow of execution: >> >> [...] >> It seems crucial that lockup_detector_init() is executed before fixup_ht_bug(). > > Uli, thanks for doing the follow-up analysis. I didn't know > about the fixup_ht_bug() path, but as you show, it seems to be OK. > > We could think about doing some kind of additional paranoia here, > like a wrapper around &watchdog_cpumask that checks some additional > boolean that says whether it's been properly initialized or not. > > But I think it's probably OK to leave it as-is; we already had the > potential of issues if any watchdog code was invoked prior to > init_watchdog(), for example due to the sample period being unset. > > What do you think? Chris, I also think it's probably OK to leave it as-is, in particular because you indicated in http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=143016646903545&w=2 that you are going to make watchdog_cpumask static instead of allocating it dynamically. Regards, Uli