On Wednesday 28 March 2007 15:33, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
> 
> Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> >
> > I haven't really worked out how this should interact with the nmi
> > watchdog; touch_nmi_watchdog() still ends up calling
> > touch_softlockup_watchdog(), so there's still some redundancy here.
> >
> >   
> 
> touch_nmi_watchdog is attempting to tickle _all_ CPUs softlockup watchdogs.

It is supposed to only touch the current CPU, just like it only touches
the NMI watchdog on the current CPU.


> 
> Currently, the code is incorrect -- it is calling 
> touch_softlockup_watchdog which touches only the current CPU's 
> softlockup watchdog.

Sounds correct to me.

-Andi

> 
-
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/

Reply via email to