Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1588659

Re: watchdog: softdog: fire watchdog even if softirqs do not get to run

Show all headers | View raw

On 02/27/2017 05:04 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 07:25:02PM +0100, Niklas Cassel wrote:
>> From: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@axis.com>
>>
>> Checking for timer expiration is done from the softirq TIMER_SOFTIRQ.
>>
>> Since commit 4cd13c21b207 ("softirq: Let ksoftirqd do its job"),
>> pending softirqs are no longer always handled immediately, instead,
>> if there are pending softirqs, and ksoftirqd is in state TASK_RUNNING,
>> the handling of the softirqs are deferred, and are instead supposed
>> to be handled by ksoftirqd, when ksoftirqd gets scheduled.
>>
>> If a user space process with a real-time policy starts to misbehave
>> by never relinquishing the CPU while ksoftirqd is in state TASK_RUNNING,
>> what will happen is that all softirqs will get deferred, while ksoftirqd,
>> which is supposed to handle the deferred softirqs, will never get to run.
>>
>> To make sure that the watchdog is able to fire even when we do not get
>> to run softirqs, replace the timers with hrtimers.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@axis.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
> Niklas,
>
> Please rebase onto current mainline, test, and resubmit.

I've sent out a v2 now :)

Although, I thought that it was a bit weird that the conflicting patch
was in Linus tree but is not in next-20170227.

I'm not sure if you are the web master for www.linux-watchdog.org,
but their cgit seems to be broken:
http://www.linux-watchdog.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=linux-watchdog.git;a=summary
http://www.linux-watchdog.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=linux-watchdog-next.git;a=summary


>
> Thanks,
> Guenter
>

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

[PATCH] watchdog: softdog: fire watchdog even if softirqs do not get to run Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@axis.com> - 2017-02-17 19:30 +0100
  Re: [PATCH] watchdog: softdog: fire watchdog even if softirqs do not  get to run Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> - 2017-02-19 18:40 +0100
    Re: [PATCH] watchdog: softdog: fire watchdog even if softirqs do not  get to run Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-02-20 09:40 +0100
      Re: [PATCH] watchdog: softdog: fire watchdog even if softirqs do not  get to run Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> - 2017-02-20 11:50 +0100
    Re: [PATCH] watchdog: softdog: fire watchdog even if softirqs do not  get to run Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@axis.com> - 2017-02-20 11:10 +0100
      Re: [PATCH] watchdog: softdog: fire watchdog even if softirqs do not  get to run Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> - 2017-02-20 16:40 +0100
  Re: [PATCH] watchdog: softdog: fire watchdog even if softirqs do not  get to run Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> - 2017-02-20 16:40 +0100
  Re: watchdog: softdog: fire watchdog even if softirqs do not get to  run Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> - 2017-02-27 05:10 +0100
    Re: watchdog: softdog: fire watchdog even if softirqs do not get to  run Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@axis.com> - 2017-02-27 14:10 +0100
      Re: watchdog: softdog: fire watchdog even if softirqs do not get to  run Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net> - 2017-02-27 15:40 +0100

csiph-web