lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Sep]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: v2.3.17pre1 - Patches, Complaints, Questions and Jubilations


On Thu, 9 Sep 1999, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
>
> There are many kind of automatic deadlock detection in the ikd patch. I
> believe you are talking about the IO-APIC-NMI_WATCHDOG from Ingo, since
> it's the only one that may run on a serious production envinroment as a
> default thing.

Yes. The semaphore and spinlock "deadlock" detectors that depend on
timeouts or on a maximum number of spinlock iterations are definitely not
acceptable on any kind of production machine.

> But the NMI patch has a performance-downside too: the timer irq will be
> driven from the 8259 and not from the apic chip (the io-apic will instead
> run an NMI irq for the same hardware-event), and that means all timer irq
> handlers will be run on the first CPU and so the kernel will scale worse
> (the other CPU may be idle at the same time).
>
> So if you want it into the stock kernel I am fine with it, but I believe
> it's not a good idea to make it a default thing.

Good point. Never mind.

Linus


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:53    [W:0.077 / U:0.156 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site