On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 07:18:23 -0400
Konrad Rzeszutek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I tested your patch along with mine and found two things out:
>
> 1). Missing this patch (for i386 platform)
>
> diff --git a/arch/i386/kernel/traps.c b/arch/i386/kernel/traps.c
> index 90da057..9f3a7ff 100644
> --
Hey Andrew,
I tested your patch along with mine and found two things out:
1). Missing this patch (for i386 platform)
diff --git a/arch/i386/kernel/traps.c b/arch/i386/kernel/traps.c
index 90da057..9f3a7ff 100644
--- a/arch/i386/kernel/traps.c
+++ b/arch/i386/kernel/traps.c
@@ -207,6 +207,7 @@ s
On Mon, 9 Jul 2007 11:53:02 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> static void print_trace_address(void *data, unsigned long addr)
> {
> + static int i = 0;
> + if (i && ((i % 8) == 0))
> + touch_nmi_watchdog();
> + i++;
> printk_address(addr);
> }
I dou
On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 10:02:42AM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek wrote:
> On large memory configuration with not so fast CPUs the NMI watchdog
> is triggered when memory addresses are being gathered and printed.
> The code paths for Alt-SysRq-t are sprinkled with touch_nmi_watchdog
> in various places
4 matches
Mail list logo