Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86_64 nmi_watchdog: Make check_nmi_watchdog static

[Eric W. Biederman]

Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx> writes:

> On Tuesday 04 October 2005 17:11, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> By using a late_initcall as i386 does we don't need to call
>> check_nmi_watchdog manually after SMP startup, and we don't
>> need different code paths for SMP and non SMP.
>>
>> This paves the way for moving apic initialization into init_IRQ,
>> where it belongs.
>
> I don't like it. I want to see a clear message in the log when
> the NMI watchdog doesn't work and with your patch that comes too late.

Why is it to late?

> -Andi (who has rejected similar patches before)

Would it be more appropriate to make this a per cpu check?  
I am just trying to make the code path clean so we don't have
special SMP/non-SMP logic.  Anything that achieves that is
fine with me.

Eric

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/