Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>
> ---
>  kernel/softlockup.c |   28 +++++++++++++++++++---------
>  1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> ===================================================================
> --- a/kernel/softlockup.c
> +++ b/kernel/softlockup.c
> @@ -17,8 +17,8 @@
>  
>  static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(print_lock);
>  
> -static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, touch_timestamp);
> -static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, print_timestamp);
> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long long, touch_timestamp);
> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long long, print_timestamp);
>  static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct task_struct *, watchdog_task);
>  
>  static int did_panic = 0;
> @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ static struct notifier_block panic_block
>  
>  void touch_softlockup_watchdog(void)
>  {
> -     __raw_get_cpu_var(touch_timestamp) = jiffies;
> +     __raw_get_cpu_var(touch_timestamp) = sched_clock();
>  }
>   

I'd like to see this patch implement/fix touch_cpu_softlockup_watchdog 
and touch_softlockup_watchdog to mimic touch_nmi_watchdog's behaviour.

See this now obsolete patch: http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/3/15/131

P.
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization

Reply via email to