Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Thu, 8 May 2008 12:25:14 -0700 | | From | Andrew Morton <> | | Subject | Re: [PATCH -mm][v2] ratelimit rewrite |
On Tue, 6 May 2008 10:25:58 +0800
Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@gmail.com> wrote:
> static inline void rcu_enter_nohz(void)
> {
> + static DEFINE_RATELIMIT_STATE(rs, 10 * HZ, 1);
> smp_mb(); /* CPUs seeing ++ must see prior RCU read-side crit sects */
> __get_cpu_var(rcu_dyntick_sched).dynticks++;
> - WARN_ON_SECS(__get_cpu_var(rcu_dyntick_sched).dynticks & 0x1, 10);
> + WARN_ON_RATELIMIT(__get_cpu_var(rcu_dyntick_sched).dynticks & 0x1, &rs);
> }
>
> static inline void rcu_exit_nohz(void)
> {
> + static DEFINE_RATELIMIT_STATE(rs, 10 * HZ, 1);
> __get_cpu_var(rcu_dyntick_sched).dynticks++;
> smp_mb(); /* CPUs seeing ++ must see later RCU read-side crit sects */
> - WARN_ON_SECS(!(__get_cpu_var(rcu_dyntick_sched).dynticks & 0x1), 10);
> + WARN_ON_RATELIMIT(!(__get_cpu_var(rcu_dyntick_sched).dynticks & 0x1),
> + &rs);
Why are we altering the RCU code in this patch, btw? It seems fairly
random that we happened to choose these particular WARN_ONs. Do they have
a history of triggering?
|  |