Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 16:04:42 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Ulrich Obergfell <uobergfe@redhat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] watchdog: introduce touch_softlockup_watchdog_sched()
Message-ID: <20151203150442.GR17308@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20151203002810.GJ19878@mtj.duckdns.org>
 <20151203093350.GP17308@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20151203100018.GO11639@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20151203144811.GA27463@mtj.duckdns.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20151203144811.GA27463@mtj.duckdns.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 552
Lines: 13

On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 09:48:11AM -0500, Tejun Heo wrote:
> We can add MEM_RECLAIM -> !MEM_RECLAIM warning mechanism in addition
> but I think adding stall detection is justified.

Sure, a stall mech is always nice, but I was thinking we should be able
to better catch some of these with explicit stuff.


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