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:0.113 / U:0.616 seconds]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site