From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261879AbTLPQmT (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Dec 2003 11:42:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261929AbTLPQmT (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Dec 2003 11:42:19 -0500 Received: from chaos.analogic.com ([204.178.40.224]:16003 "EHLO chaos.analogic.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261879AbTLPQmR (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Dec 2003 11:42:17 -0500 Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 11:44:25 -0500 (EST) From: "Richard B. Johnson" X-X-Sender: root@chaos Reply-To: root@chaos.analogic.com To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" cc: George Anzinger , Linux kernel Subject: Re: Catching NForce2 lockup with NMI watchdog In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <3FD5F9C1.5060704@nishanet.com> <3FDA40DA.20409@mvista.com> <3FDE2AC6.30902@mvista.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 16 Dec 2003, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > On Tue, 16 Dec 2003, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > > > Masking OFF the timer channel 0 in the interrupt controller > > is probably the easiest thing to do. The port is read-write, > > and the OCW default to having it accessible. > > Note we are writing about configurations involving an I/O APIC, so things > are not that easy -- the 8254 timer IRQ may be wired in different ways. > > -- > + Maciej W. Rozycki, Technical University of Gdansk, Poland + > +--------------------------------------------------------------+ > + e-mail: macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl, PGP key available + Well if I was trying to isolate a problem, I would make it that easy. You boot the machine in its simplist configuration and work "up" from there. Although I haven't looked at recent source-code, with APIC, the problem is even simpler. If you booted with APIC, just set the global "using_apic_timer" to zero and, voila`, timer-ticks stop. Any any event, the caller needs to know that if there is any code executing anywhere that does the equivalent of for(;;) ; ...the machine will lock-up forever because without that timer, there will be no preemption. Once a CPU-hog gets the CPU, only and interrupt can get it away. Cheers, Dick Johnson Penguin : Linux version 2.4.22 on an i686 machine (797.90 BogoMips). Note 96.31% of all statistics are fiction.