Dave Jones wrote:
> He wants to do this with interrupts off. on_each_cpu won't work in
> that situation.
>
I was thinking just before his big pause. But it sounds like its fairly
marginal.
> > Or patch the softlockup watchdog to add a way to temporarily disable it.
>
> Seems pretty much the
On Thu, Mar 22, 2007 at 03:46:54PM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Cestonaro, Thilo (external) wrote:
> > It's a condition of a customer of us, so I can't change it.
> >
> > But it happens not often that my part is used. So I thought there is a
> > mechanism to disable or reset the watchd
Cestonaro, Thilo (external) wrote:
> It's a condition of a customer of us, so I can't change it.
>
> But it happens not often that my part is used. So I thought there is a
> mechanism to disable or reset the watchdog
> because it is a legal pause for it. And there is one
> "touch_softlockup_watch
> Sounds like you have a fundamentally incompatible set of requirements.
Sounds so yep :)
> Why do you need the softlockup watchdog if you intend to induce soft
> lockups on purpose?
It's a condition of a customer of us, so I can't change it.
But it happens not often that my part is used. So I
On 3/22/07, Cestonaro, Thilo (external)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just disable the softlockup watchdog.
Thx for your answer, but this is no option for me, as I said in my first post
:(.
Sounds like you have a fundamentally incompatible set of requirements.
Why do you need the softlockup w
> Just disable the softlockup watchdog.
Thx for your answer, but this is no option for me, as I said in my first post
:(.
Thilo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/m
On 3/22/07, Cestonaro, Thilo (external)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You didn't explain _why_ you need to sleep for such a long time,
> and as you didn't give a pointer to your code, there's not
> much people can do to recommend changes other than "don't do that".
The code which is executed betw
> You didn't explain _why_ you need to sleep for such a long time,
> and as you didn't give a pointer to your code, there's not
> much people can do to recommend changes other than "don't do that".
The code which is executed between the local_irq_disable and enable,
is just a function call into ou
On Wed, Mar 21, 2007 at 05:06:34PM +0100, Cestonaro, Thilo (external) wrote:
> Hey,
>
> my module generates this ugly softlockup dump, because all cpus are stopped
> longer then 10 secs.
> What I do is:
> [code]
> local_irq_disable();
> // my stuff which takes long and stopps all cpus
>
Hey,
my module generates this ugly softlockup dump, because all cpus are stopped
longer then 10 secs.
What I do is:
[code]
local_irq_disable();
// my stuff which takes long and stopps all cpus
.
touch_softlockup_watchdog();
local_irq_enable();
[/code]
this prevents a dump of my current cpu b
10 matches
Mail list logo