Hi,
On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 8:26 AM Petr Mladek <pmla...@suse.com> wrote:
>
> > +int __weak watchdog_nmi_enable(unsigned int cpu) { return 0; }
> > +void __weak watchdog_nmi_disable(unsigned int cpu) { return; }
>
> Honestly, the mix of softlockup and hardlockup code was a hard to
> follow even before this patch. And it is going to be worse.
>
> Anyway, the buddy watchdog is not using NMI at all. It should not
> get enable using a function called *_nmi_enabled().
Thanks for your review! I'm not going to individually reply to all
your comments below, but I've sent out a v4 [1] where I think I've
done a semi-decent job of making this a little cleaner (not perfect,
but hopefully a step in the right direction). Please take a look.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230504221349.1535669-1-diand...@chromium.org
> Also some comments are not longer valid, for example:
>
> static void watchdog_enable(unsigned int cpu)
> {
> [...]
> /* Enable the perf event */
> if (watchdog_enabled & NMI_WATCHDOG_ENABLED)
> watchdog_nmi_enable(cpu);
Ugh, after I sent the new version I just realized that I missed
updating the above comment. :( If I need to send a v5 I can update it
then, or if v4 lands I can send a follow-on patch to update that
comment. My eyes are glazed over enough from trying to organize a
17-patch series, so I somewhat imagine it's not the only comment I
missed...
-Doug
_______________________________________________
Kgdb-bugreport mailing list
Kgdb-bugreport@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kgdb-bugreport
