Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Fix WARN_ON / WARN_ON_ONCE regression | From | Tim Chen <> | Date | Thu, 05 Oct 2006 14:01:46 -0700 |
| |
On Thu, 2006-10-05 at 17:31 -0400, Andrew James Wade wrote: > On Thursday 05 October 2006 04:36, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 04:13:07 -0400 > > Andrew James Wade <andrew.j.wade@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > (...) > > > > > > That all looks OK (by sheer luck). > > > > Well. What's the cache line size on that machine? Every exit() will cause > > a down_read() on task_exit_notifier's lock which might affect things. And > > I think you snipped the above list a bit short (depending on that line > > size). > > > > > > But still, we know that moving those things into __read_mostly didn't fix > > it, yes? > > No. To my knowledge Tim Chen hasn't tried __read_mostly, and I have not > attempted to replicate the test case. (I only have a uniprocessor > machine.) Core 2 machines have a cache line size of 64 bytes, but Tim > Chen is likely using a different kernel/.config than I am so my objdump > isn't definitive. > > Tim, perhaps you can try the __read_mostly marking as Andrew suggests? >
I have run the workload with __read_mostly marking. But it didn't make a difference. By the way, the cache line size of my machine is 64 bytes.
Thanks.
Tim - 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/
| |