On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Ingo Molnar<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> * jidong xiao <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi, Ingo,
>>
>> I am looking the source code of function softlockup_tick()
>>
>>     137         /* Warn about unreasonable delays: */
>>     138         if (now <= (touch_timestamp + softlockup_thresh))
>>     139                 return;
>>     140
>>     141         per_cpu(print_timestamp, this_cpu) = touch_timestamp;
>>     142
>>     143         spin_lock(&print_lock);
>>     144         printk(KERN_ERR "BUG: soft lockup - CPU#%d stuck for
>> %lus! [%s:%d]\n",
>>     145                         this_cpu, now - touch_timestamp,
>>     146                         current->comm, task_pid_nr(current));
>>     147         print_modules();
>>     148         print_irqtrace_events(current);
>>     149         if (regs)
>>     150                 show_regs(regs);
>>     151         else
>>     152                 dump_stack();
>>     153         spin_unlock(&print_lock);
>>     154
>>     155         if (softlockup_panic)
>>     156                 panic("softlockup: hung tasks");
>>
>> my kernel is kdb patched kernel, and it looks like if I stay in kdb
>> for more than 60 seconds, I will receive a warning about softlockup
>> when I leave kdb. it is very annoying to see the warning message
>> especially in SMP environment, sometimes this could even hung the
>> machine. A simple way here is:
>>
>> #ifdef CONFIG_KDB
>>  not trigger softlockup or set softlockup_thresh to be a very high value.
>> #elseif
>>  trigger softlockup if CPU stuck for more than 60 seconds
>> #endif
>>
>> However I feel this approach is far from perfect. Do you have any
>> advice on how to avoid this warning?
>
> Where does kdb spend this time? It's probably polling on something
> (keyboard ports?) - so the right approach would be to fix up the
> touch_timestamp or so.
>
Yes sometime we would stay in kdb for a while, because when you drop
into kdb and you don't type 'go', then you will stay in kdb. During
these time, kdb just polling on the ps2 keyboards/usb keyboards/serial
ports to monitor any inputs.

> I suspect kgdb has similar problems - if you fix it there and if you
> have to touch kernel/softlockup.c for that i can apply those bits
> even though kdb patches are not upstream.
>
>        Ingo
>

I took a look at kernel/softlockup.c and saw there is function called
touch_softlockup_watchdog(), I guess this function should be similar
to touch_nmi_watchdog(), right? If they are similar, I mean judging
from users' perpective, then we need not change kernel/softlockup.c,
instead of that, we just need invoke touch_softlockup_watchdog() at
the same places where we call touch_nmi_watchdog() in kdb code.

In addition, I believe kgdb has similar problems like kdb. I can see
touch_nmi_watchdog() is called here and there in kdb code as well as
in kgdb code.

Regards
Jason

_______________________________________________
kdb mailing list
[email protected]
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/kdb

Reply via email to