Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 11 Aug 2006 10:16:56 +0200 (CEST) | From | Esben Nielsen <> | Subject | Re: [Patch] restore the RCU callback to defer put_task_struct() Re: Problems with 2.6.17-rt8 |
| |
On Thu, 10 Aug 2006, Bill Huey wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 07:18:35PM -0700, Bill Huey wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 12:05:57AM +0200, Esben Nielsen wrote: >>> I had a long discussion with Paul McKenney about this. I opposed the patch >>> from a latency point of view: Suddenly a high-priority RT task could be >>> made into releasing a task_struct. It would be better for latencies to >>> defer it to a low priority task. >>> >>> The conclusion we ended up with was that it is not a job for the RCU >>> system, but it ought to be deferred to some other low priority task to >>> free the task_struct. >> >> I agree. It's just hack to get it not to crash at this time. It really >> should be done in another facility or utilizing another threading context. > > Esben and company, > > This is the second round of getting rid of the locking problems with free_task() > > This extends the mmdrop logic with desched_thread() to also handle free_task() > requests as well. I believe this address your concerns and I'm open to review > of this patch. > > Patch included: > > bill > > Without applying the patch and only skimming it it looks like what Paul and I concluded :-)
But is there really no generic way of defering this kind of thing? It looks like a hell of a lot work where a kind of "message" infrastructure could have solved it in a few lines.
Esben - 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/
| |