Re: [watchdog] combine nmi_watchdog and softlockup

[Aristeu Sergio Rozanski Filho]

> On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 10:46:50PM -0400, Aristeu Sergio Rozanski Filho wrote:
> > Hi Don,
> > > +/* deprecated */
> > > +static int __init nosoftlockup_setup(char *str)
> > > +{
> > > +	no_watchdog = 1;
> > > +	return 1;
> > > +}
> > > +__setup("nosoftlockup", nosoftlockup_setup);
> > > +static int __init nonmi_watchdog_setup(char *str)
> > > +{
> > > +	no_watchdog = 1;
> > > +	return 1;
> > > +}
> > > +__setup("nonmi_watchdog", nonmi_watchdog_setup);
> > didn't you just add nonmi_watchdog parameter? I don't think there's a reason
> > to keep compatibility here.
> 
> Hmm, I think you are right.  I thought I added that because it existed in
> the old nmi_watchdog setup but I can't find it.  So yeah, I can drop that.
you could provide a nmi_watchdog=0 backwards compatibility and warn about
values != 0

-- 
Aristeu

--
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/