Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:09:51 +1100 | From | Nick Piggin <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] possible scheduler deadlock in 2.6.16 |
| |
Anton Blanchard wrote:
> One way to solve this is to always take runqueues in cpu id order. To do > this we add a cpu variable to the runqueue and check it in the > double runqueue locking functions. > > Thoughts? >
You're right. I can't think of a better fix, although we've been trying to avoid adding cpu to the runqueue structure.
I was going to suggest moving more work into wake_sleeping_dependent instead, but cores with 4 and more threads now make that less desirable I suppose.
-- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
- 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/
| |