From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1163345AbdEZAbZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 May 2017 20:31:25 -0400 Received: from mail-pf0-f195.google.com ([209.85.192.195]:33914 "EHLO mail-pf0-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1163310AbdEZAbV (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 May 2017 20:31:21 -0400 Date: Fri, 26 May 2017 10:31:03 +1000 From: Nicholas Piggin To: Don Zickus Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] watchdog: introduce arch_touch_nmi_watchdog() Message-ID: <20170526103103.31fd6801@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <20170525135559.ltu4coxjghx2ovce@redhat.com> References: <20170525082856.21685-1-npiggin@gmail.com> <20170525082856.21685-3-npiggin@gmail.com> <20170525135559.ltu4coxjghx2ovce@redhat.com> Organization: IBM X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.14.1 (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 25 May 2017 09:55:59 -0400 Don Zickus wrote: > On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 06:28:54PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote: > > For architectures that define HAVE_NMI_WATCHDOG, instead of having > > them provide the complete touch_nmi_watchdog() function, just have > > them provide arch_touch_nmi_watchdog(). > > > > This gives the generic code more flexibility in implementing this > > function, and arch implementations don't miss out on touching the > > softlockup watchdog or other generic details. > > The idea makes sense. I don't think you can have hld_touch_nmi_watchdog > defined with arch_touch_nmi_watchdog, so I am wondering if it makes sense to > combine them somehow. Though renaming hld_touch_nmi_watchdog to > arch_touch_nmi_watchdog sounds odd, I think it mimics the idea. Yeah I agree it's not quite right, and I think using arch_touch_nmi_watchdog would be fine for the hld, which makes sense if you think of it as a utility or library function for architectures that want a hardlockup watchdog and can use perf for it. I can change that if you prefer. BTW the 0day picked up another Kconfig compile bug, so I'll respin the series and include any changes you like. Thanks, Nick