Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 17 Nov 2007 16:34:56 -0800 | From | Jeremy Fitzhardinge <> | Subject | Re: [stable] Soft lockups since stable kernel upgrade to 2.6.23.8 |
| |
Greg KH wrote: > Great, thanks for tracking this down. > > Ingo, this corrisponds to changeset > a115d5caca1a2905ba7a32b408a6042b20179aaa in mainline. Is that patch > incorrect? Should this patch in the -stable tree be reverted? >
Hm, I've never observed a problem with this in mainline.
Ah. The significant difference between 2.6.23 and -git is that the former used sched_clock as the softlockup timebase, versus cpu_clock in git. If sched_clock() is tsc-based, and the tsc isn't stable when using cpufreq, then the softlockup with get confused and fire spuriously. Ingo's fix to reporting exposed the fact that softlockup is terminally broken in that kernel.
I think the best course for now is to revert it, since softlockup is hardly a critical feature. The proper fixes would either be to backport cpu_clock() to 2.6.23, or make it go back to using ticks.
J - 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/
| |