[lkml]   [2008]   [Jul]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] stopmachine: add stopmachine_timeout
    Am Dienstag, 15. Juli 2008 schrieb Rusty Russell:
    > > btw Rusty, I just had this "why didn't I think of that" moments. This is
    > > actually another way of handling my workload. I mean it certainly does not
    > > fix the root case of the problems and we still need other things that we
    > > talked about (non-blocking module delete, lock-free module insertion, etc)
    > > but at least in the mean time it avoids wedging the machines for good.
    > > btw I'd like that timeout in milliseconds. I think 5 seconds is way tooooo
    > > long :).
    > We can make it ms, sure. 200ms should be plenty of time: worst I ever saw
    > 150ms, and that was some weird Power box doing crazy stuff. I wouldn't be
    > surprised if you'd never see 1ms on your hardware.

    I disagree that 5 seconds is to long :-). I even think having it default to 0
    is the safest option for virtualized environments. What if the host is paging
    like hell and the vcpu cannot run due to a missing page? In that case 200ms
    can be an incredible short amount of time. If the timeout triggers,
    stop_machine_run fails, but everything would work fine - it just takes

     \ /
      Last update: 2008-07-16 11:19    [W:0.041 / U:65.356 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site