Prarit Bhargava wrote: > I think that's a good idea -- I'll propose an add on patch to fix the > sysrq-t case ...
I'm working on this patch at the moment. I'm just wondering what happens if you do a global re-enable while a CPU is locally disabled. I think it won't matter; it will end up in the "enabled but need to update timestamp" state, and the next time it gets a timer tick, it will simply update the timestamp and carry on. (This is relative to the other two softlockup patches, but modified since I posted them.) J diff -r 4c81d8cafb67 drivers/char/sysrq.c --- a/drivers/char/sysrq.c Tue Mar 27 01:16:07 2007 -0700 +++ b/drivers/char/sysrq.c Tue Mar 27 01:18:05 2007 -0700 @@ -408,6 +408,8 @@ void __handle_sysrq(int key, struct tty_ int i; unsigned long flags; + softlockup_global_disable(); + spin_lock_irqsave(&sysrq_key_table_lock, flags); orig_log_level = console_loglevel; console_loglevel = 7; @@ -445,6 +447,8 @@ void __handle_sysrq(int key, struct tty_ console_loglevel = orig_log_level; } spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sysrq_key_table_lock, flags); + + softlockup_global_enable(); } /* diff -r 4c81d8cafb67 include/linux/sched.h --- a/include/linux/sched.h Tue Mar 27 01:16:07 2007 -0700 +++ b/include/linux/sched.h Tue Mar 27 01:18:05 2007 -0700 @@ -235,6 +235,8 @@ extern void softlockup_tick(void); extern void softlockup_tick(void); extern void softlockup_enable(void); extern void softlockup_disable(void); +extern void softlockup_global_enable(void); +extern void softlockup_global_disable(void); extern void spawn_softlockup_task(void); extern void touch_softlockup_watchdog(void); #else @@ -245,6 +247,12 @@ static inline void softlockup_enable(voi { } static inline void softlockup_disable(void) +{ +} +static inline void softlockup_global_enable(void) +{ +} +static inline void softlockup_global_disable(void) { } static inline void spawn_softlockup_task(void) diff -r 4c81d8cafb67 kernel/softlockup.c --- a/kernel/softlockup.c Tue Mar 27 01:16:07 2007 -0700 +++ b/kernel/softlockup.c Tue Mar 27 01:18:05 2007 -0700 @@ -17,10 +17,16 @@ static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(print_lock); +enum enable { + SL_OFF = 0, /* disabled */ + SL_UPDATE, /* enabled, but timestamp old */ + SL_ON, /* enabled */ +}; + 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 DEFINE_PER_CPU(int, enabled); +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(enum enable, enabled); static int did_panic = 0; @@ -39,6 +45,8 @@ void touch_softlockup_watchdog(void) void touch_softlockup_watchdog(void) { __raw_get_cpu_var(touch_timestamp) = sched_clock(); + barrier(); /* update timestamp before enable */ + __raw_get_cpu_var(enabled) = SL_ON; } EXPORT_SYMBOL(touch_softlockup_watchdog); @@ -57,13 +65,27 @@ void softlockup_enable(void) void softlockup_enable(void) { touch_softlockup_watchdog(); - barrier(); /* update timestamp before enable */ - __get_cpu_var(enabled) = 1; } void softlockup_disable(void) { - __get_cpu_var(enabled) = 0; + __get_cpu_var(enabled) = SL_OFF; +} + +void softlockup_global_enable() +{ + unsigned cpu; + + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) + per_cpu(enabled, cpu) = SL_UPDATE; +} + +void softlockup_global_disable() +{ + unsigned cpu; + + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) + per_cpu(enabled, cpu) = SL_OFF; } /* @@ -79,9 +101,19 @@ void softlockup_tick(void) touch_timestamp = get_timestamp(&__get_cpu_var(touch_timestamp)); - /* return if not enabled */ - if (!__get_cpu_var(enabled)) - return; + switch(__get_cpu_var(enabled)) { + case SL_OFF: + /* not enabled */ + return; + + case SL_UPDATE: + /* update timestamp */ + touch_softlockup_watchdog(); + break; + + case SL_ON: + break; + } print_timestamp = __get_cpu_var(print_timestamp); - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/