Re: i386 nmi_watchdog: Merge check_nmi_watchdog fixes from x86_64

[Eric W. Biederman]

Bill Davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx> writes:

> Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> The per cpu nmi watchdog timer is based on an event counter.  idle cpus don't
>> generate events so the NMI watchdog doesn't fire
>> and the test to see if the watchdog is working fails.
>
> Question: given all the concern about reducing clocks and all, do we actually
> need nmi on more than one CPU? Are there cases where a single CPU hangs in idle
> on an SMP system?

I really don't know, but the normal interrupt rate is once per second or slower
if the cpu is idle.  I was just working in the vicinity and discovered when
I enabled the nmi watchdog it failed to come on because it didn't handled it's
initialization test properly, and x86_64 had already fixed it.

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/