LinuxPPC-Dev Archive on
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Linus Torvalds <>
To: Thomas Gleixner <>
Cc: LKML <>,
	Ingo Molnar <>, "H. Peter Anvin" <>,
	Peter Zijlstra <>,
	Don Zickus <>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <>,
	Michael Ellerman <>,
	Nicholas Piggin <>,
	ppc-dev <>
Subject: Re: [RFC GIT Pull] core watchdog sanitizing
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2017 12:04:17 -0700
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1710021957480.2114@nanos>

On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 11:46 AM, Thomas Gleixner <> 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

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

This may be all obviously safe, I'm just asking for clarification.


  reply index

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <alpine.DEB.2.20.1710011217510.3874@nanos>
     [not found] ` <>
2017-10-02 18:46   ` 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:

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

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

LinuxPPC-Dev Archive on

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror linuxppc-dev/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linuxppc-dev linuxppc-dev/ \
	public-inbox-index linuxppc-dev

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:

AGPL code for this site: git clone