lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Jul]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Realtime Preemption, 2.6.12, Beginners Guide?

* Alistair John Strachan <s0348365@sms.ed.ac.uk> wrote:

> Interesting. They're both exactly 10001 jiffies apart.
>
> BUG: soft lockup detected on CPU#0! -283805--293806

yes, that's the 10 second softlockup timeout.

does the patch below help? We initialized the timestamps to 0, but with
jiffies starting out negative, that means a ~5 minutes gap until we
first reach a value of 0. That would explain the messages. The only
thing it doesnt explain, why did this only trigger on your box?

Ingo

Index: linux/kernel/softlockup.c
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/kernel/softlockup.c
+++ linux/kernel/softlockup.c
@@ -16,9 +16,9 @@

static DEFINE_RAW_SPINLOCK(print_lock);

-static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, timeout) = 0;
-static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, timestamp) = 0;
-static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, print_timestamp) = 0;
+static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, timeout) = INITIAL_JIFFIES;
+static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, timestamp) = INITIAL_JIFFIES;
+static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, print_timestamp) = INITIAL_JIFFIES;
static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct task_struct *, watchdog_task);

static int did_panic = 0;
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-07-07 01:50    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans