From: "Luiz Capitulino (Red Hat)" <luiz.capitulino@linux.dev>
To: Michael Ellerman <mpe@tenstorrent.com>,
maddy@linux.ibm.com, npiggin@gmail.com,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Cc: chleroy@kernel.org, ritesh.list@gmail.com, sshegde@linux.ibm.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/watchdog: disable watchdog when watchdog_thresh=0
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2026 10:13:26 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <cb06b1b9-fed4-4071-964d-90ae44803440@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9fada7bf-11b5-45b6-858d-4c6b79d6a507@kernel.org>
On 11/6/26 5:26 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On 4/11/26 2:40 pm, Luiz Capitulino (Red Hat) wrote:
>> On powerpc, trying to disable the hardlockup detector with:
>>
>> # echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/watchdog_thresh
>>
>> causes an immediate and endless hardlockup detection, eventually leading
>> to an unusable system (splat example below).
>
> ...
>> This condition is already checked in __lockup_detector_reconfigure() for
>> the soft lockup detector and the arch-independent hardlockup detector,
>> what's missing is powerpc performing the same check in start_watchdog().
>
> Arguably setting watchdog_thresh to 0 should mean watchdog_enabled becomes false.
> Then there wouldn't need to be extra checks for thresh == 0 anywhere.
>
> But if the existing code already checks for thresh == 0 then this is fine.
Yes, the common code in kernel/watchdog.c actually checks for both.
Thanks for the review.
>
>> Fixes: 2104180a5369 ("powerpc/64s: implement arch-specific hardlockup watchdog")
>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
>> Signed-off-by: Luiz Capitulino (Red Hat) <luiz.capitulino@linux.dev>
>> ---
>> Notes:
>> - This issue was not discovered by AI. We have a new test-case in our CI that
>> sets watchdog_thresh=0, when running on powerpc we get the described issue
>> - This issue was initially reproduced on Power10, but I developed the fix
>> on Power9 (which is what I have access now)
>>
>> arch/powerpc/kernel/watchdog.c | 3 +++
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/watchdog.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/watchdog.c
>> index 582ee3fd71c1..44f178e07531 100644
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/watchdog.c
>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/watchdog.c
>> @@ -487,6 +487,9 @@ static void start_watchdog(void *arg)
>> if (!(watchdog_enabled & WATCHDOG_HARDLOCKUP_ENABLED))
>> return;
>> + if (!watchdog_thresh)
>> + return;
>> +
>> if (!cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, &watchdog_cpumask))
>> return;
>
>
> Fix looks good to me.
>
> Reviewed-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@kernel.org>
>
> cheers
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-06 15:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-11-04 3:40 Luiz Capitulino (Red Hat)
2026-11-06 10:26 ` Michael Ellerman
2026-11-06 15:13 ` Luiz Capitulino (Red Hat) [this message]
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=cb06b1b9-fed4-4071-964d-90ae44803440@linux.dev \
--to=luiz.capitulino@linux.dev \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chleroy@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=maddy@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=mpe@tenstorrent.com \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=ritesh.list@gmail.com \
--cc=sshegde@linux.ibm.com \
/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®