From: "stephane eranian" <eranian@googlemail.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: "Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu>, "Andi Kleen" <andi@firstfloor.org>,
tglx@linutronix.de
Subject: NMI watchdog setup_lapic_nmi_watchdog() problem
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2008 17:45:32 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7c86c4470810070845w1346107cx211148c52fd03b68@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
Hello,
I was doing some more testing with perfmon when I ran into
a problem with the NMI watchdog code in 2.6.27-rc8.
Since 2.6.20, it is possible to enable/disable the NMI watchdog
on-the-fly via /proc/sys/kernel/nmi_watchdog. This is a nice option
which avoids having to reboot the kernel.
Enabling/disabling the NMI watchdog uses two internal functions
enable_lapic_nmi_watchdog() and disable_lapic_nmi_watchdog().
Enable_lapic_nmi_watchdog() uses a IPI handler to setup the
APIC on each CPU. However, it turns out that this handler, namely,
setup_apic_nmi_watchdog() relies on some explicit ordering constraint
due to suspend/resume constraints as explained in the comment
below:
void setup_apic_nmi_watchdog(void *unused)
{
if (__get_cpu_var(wd_enabled))
return;
/* cheap hack to support suspend/resume */
/* if cpu0 is not active neither should the other cpus */
if (smp_processor_id() != 0 && atomic_read(&nmi_active) <= 0)
return;
switch (nmi_watchdog) {
[snip]
}
Supposing watchdog was disabled via /proc, nmi_active = 0. Then if you
re-enable, and if CPU0 is not the first to execute the IPI handler, then none
of the other CPUS will re-enable their NMI watchdog timer. On a quad-core
system, I have seen, for instance, 2 out of 4 with NMI watchdogs re-enabled.
I am not an expert at suspend/resume. I am assuming there was a race condition
there and that's why this code was added early on. The problem is that it now
conflicts with the /proc option.
It is not clear to me how this works during boot. Obviously the order
is respected
and all CPUs have their NMI watchdog enabled.
Until I understand the suspend/resume issue, it is hard to provide a
fix for this.
Any comments?
next reply other threads:[~2008-10-07 15:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-10-07 15:45 stephane eranian [this message]
2008-10-07 20:21 ` Andrew Morton
2008-10-07 21:10 ` stephane eranian
2008-10-07 23:45 ` Andi Kleen
2008-10-07 23:57 ` stephane eranian
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=7c86c4470810070845w1346107cx211148c52fd03b68@mail.gmail.com \
--to=eranian@googlemail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=eranian@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®