From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
ppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC GIT Pull] core watchdog sanitizing
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2017 12:04:17 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFyVX_aPac8dSJPED-XLTtfQOYe_eCV7HdYKABgGazWHAg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1710021957480.2114@nanos>
On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 11:46 AM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
> I agree that adding that 'run' argument was certainly not a piece of
> art. Though I disagree with the sentiment that non-functional garbage is
> preferrable over functionally correct code which merily contains a bad
> implementation choice.
I agree that it's somewhat arbitrary, but I also find it really hard
to vet code where my initial reaction is just "this is too ugly".
So it may be superficial, but ..
> Enough vented. Find below the cure for that major offense.
Looks much better to me. Thanks.
Side note: would it perhaps make sense to have that
cpus_read_lock/unlock() sequence around the whole reconfiguration
section?
Because while looking at that sequence, it looks a bit odd to me that
cpu's can come and go in the middle of the nmi watchdog
reconfiguration sequence.
In particular, what happens if a new CPU is brought up just as the NMI
matchdog is being reconfigured? The NMI's have been stopped for the
old CPU's, what happens for the new one that came up in between that
watchdog_nmi_stop/start?
This may be all obviously safe, I'm just asking for clarification.
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-10-02 19:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <alpine.DEB.2.20.1710011217510.3874@nanos>
[not found] ` <CA+55aFxQsmSb=zohGZOZK7eR4n5xOHNArmCa9j1b7+wJ+khQrg@mail.gmail.com>
2017-10-02 18:46 ` [RFC GIT Pull] core watchdog sanitizing Thomas Gleixner
2017-10-02 19:04 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2017-10-02 19:32 ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-10-02 20:32 ` Don Zickus
2017-10-02 20:45 ` Thomas Gleixner
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=CA+55aFyVX_aPac8dSJPED-XLTtfQOYe_eCV7HdYKABgGazWHAg@mail.gmail.com \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=dzickus@redhat.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).