Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 8 May 2008 12:25:14 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH -mm][v2] ratelimit rewrite |
| |
On Tue, 6 May 2008 10:25:58 +0800 Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@gmail.com> wrote:
> static inline void rcu_enter_nohz(void) > { > + static DEFINE_RATELIMIT_STATE(rs, 10 * HZ, 1); > smp_mb(); /* CPUs seeing ++ must see prior RCU read-side crit sects */ > __get_cpu_var(rcu_dyntick_sched).dynticks++; > - WARN_ON_SECS(__get_cpu_var(rcu_dyntick_sched).dynticks & 0x1, 10); > + WARN_ON_RATELIMIT(__get_cpu_var(rcu_dyntick_sched).dynticks & 0x1, &rs); > } > > static inline void rcu_exit_nohz(void) > { > + static DEFINE_RATELIMIT_STATE(rs, 10 * HZ, 1); > __get_cpu_var(rcu_dyntick_sched).dynticks++; > smp_mb(); /* CPUs seeing ++ must see later RCU read-side crit sects */ > - WARN_ON_SECS(!(__get_cpu_var(rcu_dyntick_sched).dynticks & 0x1), 10); > + WARN_ON_RATELIMIT(!(__get_cpu_var(rcu_dyntick_sched).dynticks & 0x1), > + &rs);
Why are we altering the RCU code in this patch, btw? It seems fairly random that we happened to choose these particular WARN_ONs. Do they have a history of triggering?
| |