Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>
> ---
> kernel/softlockup.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++---------
> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> ===================================================================
> --- a/kernel/softlockup.c
> +++ b/kernel/softlockup.c
> @@ -17,8 +17,8 @@
>
> static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(print_lock);
>
> -static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, touch_timestamp);
> -static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, print_timestamp);
> +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 int did_panic = 0;
> @@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ static struct notifier_block panic_block
>
> void touch_softlockup_watchdog(void)
> {
> - __raw_get_cpu_var(touch_timestamp) = jiffies;
> + __raw_get_cpu_var(touch_timestamp) = sched_clock();
> }
>
I'd like to see this patch implement/fix touch_cpu_softlockup_watchdog
and touch_softlockup_watchdog to mimic touch_nmi_watchdog's behaviour.
See this now obsolete patch: http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/3/15/131
P.
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
