lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Jul]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: inode_unused list corruption in 2.4.26 - spin_lock problem?
    On Thu, Jul 29, 2004 at 07:57:55AM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
    > On Thu, Jul 29, 2004 at 09:54:29AM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
    > > On Wed, Jul 28, 2004 at 11:27:41PM -0700, Chris Caputo wrote:
    > > > On Wed, 28 Jul 2004, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
    > > > > Changing the affinity writes new values to the IOAPIC registers, I can't see
    > > > > how that could interfere with the atomicity of a spinlock operation. I dont
    > > > > understand why you think irqbalance could affect anything.
    > > >
    > > > Because when I stop running irqbalance the crashes no longer happen.
    > >
    > > what is the irq distribution when you do that?
    > > Can you run irqbalance for a bit to make sure there's a static distribution
    > > of irq's and then disable it and see if it survives ?
    >
    > Chris, Yes I'm also running irqbalance.
    >
    > Arjan, what is an easy way for me to make irqbalance change the affinity
    > as crazy on the SMP 8way box, just for a test?

    there is a sleep(10 seconds) in the code, if you change that to something
    really short and then cause irq burst rates on different devices...


    [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:04    [W:0.085 / U:0.600 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site