Re: [patch] fix the softlockup watchdog to actually work

[Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>]

On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 10:52:04 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:

> 
> * Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> 
> > > apparently the functionality of the soft lockup watchdog was never 
> > > actually tested with that patch applied ...
> > > 
> > > [this is -stable material too.]
> > 
> > Still isn't working.  I'm getting random meaningless softlockup 
> > trippings coming out for no apparent reason.
> 
> hm, you still havent applied the other 4 patches i sent:
> 
>  softlockup-fix.patch
> 
>  softlockup-add-irq-regs-h.patch
>  softlockup-better-printout.patch
>  softlockup-cleanups.patch
>  softlockup-use-cpu-clock.patch
> 
> they are all necessary.

I think I have.  Seems that someone hasn't been naming their patches
consistently (which is quite irksome).  I have:

fix-the-softlockup-watchdog-to-actually-work.patch
softlockup-make-asm-irq_regsh-available-on-every-platform.patch
softlockup-improve-debug-output.patch
softlockup-watchdog-style-cleanups.patch
softlockup-add-a-proc-tuning-parameter.patch
softlockup-add-a-proc-tuning-parameter-fix.patch

> softlockup-use-cpu-clock.patch could easily solve the present problem 
> you have: as i pointed it out it is _wrong_ to use sched_clock(), 
> because sched_clock() is not a reliable clocksource. Especially on your 
> VAIO.

It fails with them all applied too:

fix-leak-on-proc-lockdep_stats.patch				OK
fix-the-softlockup-watchdog-to-actually-work.patch		BAD
softlockup-make-asm-irq_regsh-available-on-every-platform.patch
softlockup-improve-debug-output.patch				BAD
softlockup-watchdog-style-cleanups.patch
softlockup-add-a-proc-tuning-parameter.patch
softlockup-add-a-proc-tuning-parameter-fix.patch		BAD

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/