Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1283292
| From | Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] workqueue: implement lockup detector |
| Date | 2015-12-03 20:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qBI38-Xe-19@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <qBpWy-61l-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <qBpWy-61l-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <qBGkG-8hM-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
Hello, Don. On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 12:50:24PM -0500, Don Zickus wrote: > This sort of looks like the hung task detector.. > > I am a little concerned because we just made a big effort to properly > separate the hardlockup and softlockup paths and yet retain the flexibility > to enable/disable them separately. Now it seems the workqueue detector is > permanently entwined with the softlockup detector. I am not entirely sure > that is correct thing to do. The only area they get entwined is how it's controlled from userland. While it isn't quite the same as softlockup detection, I think what it monitors is close enough that it makes sense to put them under the same interface. > It also seems awkward for the lockup code to have to jump to the workqueue > code to function properly. :-/ Though we have made exceptions for the virt > stuff and the workqueue code is simple.. Softlockup code doesn't depend on workqueue in any way. Workqueue tags on touch_softlockup to detect cases which shouldn't be warned and its enabledness is controlled together with softlockup and that's it. > Actually, I am curious, it seems if you just added a > /proc/sys/kernel/wq_watchdog entry, you could elminiate the entire need for > modifying the watchdog code to begin with. As you really aren't using any > of it other than piggybacking on the touch_softlockup_watchdog stuff, which > could probably be easily added without all the extra enable/disable changes > in watchdog.c. Yeah, except for touch signal, it's purely interface thing. I don't feel too strong about this but it seems a bit silly to introduce a whole different set of interface for this. e.g. if the user wanted to disable softlockup detection, it'd be weird to leave wq lockup detection running. The same goes for threshold. > Again, this looks like what the hung task detector is doing, which I > struggled with years ago to integrate with the lockup code because in the > end I had trouble re-using much of it. So, it's a stall detector and there are inherent similarities but the conditions tested are pretty different and it's a lot lighter. I'm not really sure what you're meaning to say. Thanks. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH 1/2] watchdog: introduce touch_softlockup_watchdog_sched() Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2015-12-03 01:30 +0100
[PATCH 2/2] workqueue: implement lockup detector Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2015-12-03 01:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] workqueue: implement lockup detector Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2015-12-03 15:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] workqueue: implement lockup detector Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com> - 2015-12-03 19:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] workqueue: implement lockup detector Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2015-12-03 20:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] workqueue: implement lockup detector Ulrich Obergfell <uobergfe@redhat.com> - 2015-12-03 21:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] workqueue: implement lockup detector Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2015-12-03 22:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] workqueue: implement lockup detector Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2015-12-04 09:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] workqueue: implement lockup detector Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com> - 2015-12-04 18:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] workqueue: implement lockup detector Ulrich Obergfell <uobergfe@redhat.com> - 2015-12-04 14:30 +0100
[PATCH v2 2/2] workqueue: implement lockup detector Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2015-12-07 20:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] workqueue: implement lockup detector Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2015-12-07 22:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] workqueue: implement lockup detector Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com> - 2015-12-08 17:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] workqueue: implement lockup detector Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2015-12-08 17:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] workqueue: implement lockup detector Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com> - 2015-12-07 22:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH 1/2] watchdog: introduce touch_softlockup_watchdog_sched() Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2015-12-03 10:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH 1/2] watchdog: introduce touch_softlockup_watchdog_sched() Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2015-12-03 11:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH 1/2] watchdog: introduce touch_softlockup_watchdog_sched() Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2015-12-03 15:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH 1/2] watchdog: introduce touch_softlockup_watchdog_sched() Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2015-12-03 16:10 +0100
[PATCH] workqueue: warn if memory reclaim tries to flush !WQ_MEM_RECLAIM workqueue Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2015-12-03 20:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH] workqueue: warn if memory reclaim tries to flush !WQ_MEM_RECLAIM workqueue Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2015-12-03 21:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH] workqueue: warn if memory reclaim tries to flush !WQ_MEM_RECLAIM workqueue Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2015-12-03 22:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH] workqueue: warn if memory reclaim tries to flush !WQ_MEM_RECLAIM workqueue Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2015-12-03 22:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH] workqueue: warn if memory reclaim tries to flush !WQ_MEM_RECLAIM workqueue Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2015-12-03 23:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH] workqueue: warn if memory reclaim tries to flush !WQ_MEM_RECLAIM workqueue Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2015-12-04 14:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH] workqueue: warn if memory reclaim tries to flush !WQ_MEM_RECLAIM workqueue Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> - 2015-12-07 17:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH 1/2] watchdog: introduce touch_softlockup_watchdog_sched() Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2015-12-03 16:10 +0100
csiph-web