[lkml]   [2009]   [Jan]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v4] softlockup: remove hung_task_check_count
    Mandeep Singh Baines ( wrote:
    > Peter Zijlstra ( wrote:
    > >
    > > Why break out at all? Are you that worried about khungtaskd introducing
    > > latencies?
    > Yes, I was worried about disabling preemption for an unbounded amount of
    > time.
    > > Is using preemptible RCU an option for you?
    > >
    > I had not even considered that. To be honest, I had not even heard of it
    > till now. So I spent another morning at LWN grokking preemptible RCU;)
    > I think it can work. I'm a little worried about the OOM risk. It could take
    > a really long time to iterate over the task list. A lot of pending kfree()s
    > could build up in that time.

    I misunderstood preemptible RCU. I assumed it was a new API but its not. So
    I don't think preemptible RCU is an option since it would force a dependency

    I'm going to break up this patch in two. One patch for converting to rcu.
    A second patch which will support checking all tasks. To support checking
    all tasks I reverted back to a design similar to Frédéric original proposal.

    I'll send the patches out right after this email.

    [PATCH 1/2] softlockup: convert read_lock in hung_task to rcu_read_lock
    [PATCH 2/2] softlockup: check all tasks in hung_task

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2009-01-30 21:53    [W:0.022 / U:17.176 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site