Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261599AbVEOKgu (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 May 2005 06:36:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261603AbVEOKgu (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 May 2005 06:36:50 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:15573 "EHLO mx2.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261599AbVEOKgs (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 May 2005 06:36:48 -0400 Date: Sun, 15 May 2005 12:36:46 +0200 From: Andi Kleen To: Pavel Machek Cc: Andi Kleen , Alexander Nyberg , Jan Beulich , discuss@x86-64.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [discuss] Re: [PATCH] adjust x86-64 watchdog tick calculation Message-ID: <20050515103646.GF26242@wotan.suse.de> References: <1115892008.918.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20050512142920.GA7079@openzaurus.ucw.cz> <20050513113023.GD15755@wotan.suse.de> <20050513195215.GC3135@elf.ucw.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050513195215.GC3135@elf.ucw.cz> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1366 Lines: 31 On Fri, May 13, 2005 at 09:52:15PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > On P? 13-05-05 13:30:23, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > Because it kills machine when interrupt latency gets too high? > > > Like reading battery status using i2c... > > > > That's a bug in the I2C reader then. Don't shot the messenger for bad news. > > Disagreed. > > Linux is not real time OS. Perhaps some real-time constraints "may not > spend > 100msec with interrupts disabled" would be healthy, but it > certainly needs more discussion than "lets enable NMI > watchdog.". It needs to be written somewhere in big bold letters, too. While linux is not a real time OS it has been always known that turning off interrupts for a long time is extremly rude. If you really want you can use touch_nmi_watchdog in the delay loop then. But note you have to compile it in, because touch_nmi_watchdog is not exported (Linus vetoed that for good reasons). But again do you really need to disable interrupts during this i2c access? Can't you just use a schedule_timeout() and a semaphore? Why would other interrupts cause a problem during such a long delay? -Andi - 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/