lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Jun]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: stop_machine lockup issue in 3.9.y.
On 06/05/2013 08:46 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-06-05 at 20:41 -0700, Ben Greear wrote:
>> On 06/05/2013 08:26 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2013-06-05 at 20:14 -0700, Tejun Heo wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ah, so, that's why it's showing up now. We probably have had the same
>>>> issue all along but it used to be masked by the softirq limiting. Do
>>>> you care to revive the 10 iterations limit so that it's limited by
>>>> both the count and timing? We do wanna find out why softirq is
>>>> spinning indefinitely tho.
>>>
>>> Yes, no problem, I can do that.
>>
>> Limiting it to 5000 fixes my problem, so if you wanted it larger than 10, that would
>> be fine by me.
>>
>> I can send a version of my patch easily enough if we can agree on the max number of
>> loops (and if indeed my version of the patch is acceptable).
>
> Well, 10 was the prior limit and seems really fine.
>
> The non update on jiffies seems quite exceptional condition (I hope...)
>
> We use in Google a patch triggering warning is a thread holds the cpu
> without taking care to need_resched() for more than xx ms

Well, I'm sure that patch works nicely until the clock stops moving
forward :)

I'll post a patch with limit of 10 shortly.

Thanks,
Ben



--
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-06-06 06:22    [W:0.120 / U:0.408 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site