linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Cc: "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@intel.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"mingo@kernel.org" <mingo@kernel.org>,
	"akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"babu.moger@oracle.com" <babu.moger@oracle.com>,
	"atomlin@redhat.com" <atomlin@redhat.com>,
	"prarit@redhat.com" <prarit@redhat.com>,
	"torvalds@linux-foundation.org" <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	"peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"eranian@google.com" <eranian@google.com>,
	"acme@redhat.com" <acme@redhat.com>,
	"stable@vger.kernel.org" <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] kernel/watchdog: fix spurious hard lockups
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2017 15:00:08 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170628190008.3ftqq75evhn2hozp@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170627234822.GL23705@tassilo.jf.intel.com>

On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 04:48:22PM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > I haven't heard back any test result yet.
> > 
> > The above patch looks good to me.
> 
> This needs performance testing.  It may slow down performance or latency sensitive workloads.

More motivation to work through the issues with the proposed real fix? :-)

> 
> > Which workaround do you prefer, the above one or the one checking timestamp?
> 
> I prefer the earlier patch, it has far less risk of performance issues.

But now you are slowing down the nmi_watchdog so much that the
watchdog_thresh hold becomes meaningless, no? (granted the turbo-mode blows
it out of the water too)  So now folks who depend on the 10/5/1/whatever second
reliability lose that.  I think that might be unfair too.

The hrtimer increase maintains that and just adds a few more
interrupts/second.

Cheers,
Don

  reply	other threads:[~2017-06-28 19:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-06-21 14:41 [PATCH V2] kernel/watchdog: fix spurious hard lockups kan.liang
2017-06-21 15:12 ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-06-21 15:47   ` Liang, Kan
2017-06-21 17:40     ` Prarit Bhargava
2017-06-21 17:07   ` Andi Kleen
2017-06-21 19:59     ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-06-21 21:53 ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-06-22 15:33   ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-06-22 15:44   ` Don Zickus
2017-06-22 15:48     ` Liang, Kan
2017-06-23  8:01     ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-06-23 16:29       ` Don Zickus
2017-06-23 21:50         ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-06-26 20:19           ` Don Zickus
2017-06-26 20:30             ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-06-27 20:12             ` Don Zickus
2017-06-27 20:49               ` Liang, Kan
2017-06-27 21:09                 ` Don Zickus
2017-06-27 23:48                 ` Andi Kleen
2017-06-28 19:00                   ` Don Zickus [this message]
2017-06-28 20:14                     ` Andi Kleen
2017-06-29 15:44                       ` Don Zickus
2017-06-29 16:12                         ` Andi Kleen
2017-06-29 16:26                           ` Don Zickus
2017-06-29 16:36                             ` Andi Kleen
2017-07-17  1:24               ` Liang, Kan
2017-07-17  7:14                 ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-07-17 12:18                   ` Liang, Kan
2017-07-17 13:13                     ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-07-17 14:46                       ` Liang, Kan
2017-07-17 15:00                         ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-07-17 14:46                 ` Don Zickus
2017-08-15  1:16                   ` Liang, Kan
2017-08-15  1:28                     ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-15  7:50                     ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-08-17 15:45                       ` Liang, Kan
2017-08-18 10:39                       ` [tip:core/urgent] kernel/watchdog: Prevent false positives with turbo modes tip-bot for 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=20170628190008.3ftqq75evhn2hozp@redhat.com \
    --to=dzickus@redhat.com \
    --cc=acme@redhat.com \
    --cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=atomlin@redhat.com \
    --cc=babu.moger@oracle.com \
    --cc=eranian@google.com \
    --cc=kan.liang@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=prarit@redhat.com \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /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).