On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 1:19 PM, nilesh <nilesh.tayade@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In my opinion(uninformed ) NMI watchdog will be triggered only in case where you are holding a spinlock.It will not be triggered just because timer interrupts are disabled due to holding a spinlock.
On Fri, 2011-01-07 at 13:05 +0530, Rajat Sharma wrote:>>Sorry if I am building up the confusion here. But as Dave Hylands
> As I remember timer interrupt as well is an NMI so, it is possible
> (although not advised) to call schedule function while holding
> spinlock on same core.
>
> spin_lock_irqsave();
> schedule();
> spin_lock_irqrestore();
>
> however if you have debugging options turned on like
> CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK, you may likely get kernel warning for
> 'scheduling in atomic context'.
>
> Then what can happen if this core is allowed to switched to new
> process? Consider the case where new process as well tries to aquire
> same spin_lock() which new process can not aquire and start spinning
> for the lock for ever :). Likewise, other cores will also get locked
> down.
>
> However stil you can detect softlockup through NMI watchdog.
>>initially mentioned, there will be no timer interrupt. So shouldn't the
>>NMI watchdog get triggered then? No interrupts -> system freeze -> NMI
>>Wdt reboot.
In my opinion(uninformed ) NMI watchdog will be triggered only in case where you are holding a spinlock.It will not be triggered just because timer interrupts are disabled due to holding a spinlock.
_______________________________________________ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
