Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 27 Feb 2007 09:33:49 +0100 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: 2.6.21-rc1: known regressions (v2) (part 2) |
| |
* Michal Piotrowski <michal.k.k.piotrowski@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thomas Gleixner napisał(a): > > Adrian, > > > > On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 23:05 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > >> Subject : kernel BUG at kernel/time/tick-sched.c:168 (CONFIG_NO_HZ) > >> References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/2/16/346 > >> Submitter : Michal Piotrowski <michal.k.k.piotrowski@gmail.com> > >> Handled-By : Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> > >> Status : problem is being debugged > > > > The BUG_ON() was replaced by a warning printk(). The BUG_ON() exposed a > > problem with the SMT scheduler. See below. > > > >> Subject : BUG: soft lockup detected on CPU#0 > >> NOHZ: local_softirq_pending 20 (SMT scheduler) > >> References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/2/20/257 > >> Submitter : Michal Piotrowski <michal.k.k.piotrowski@gmail.com> > >> Handled-By : Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> > >> Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> > >> Status : problem is being debugged > > > > Patch available, not confirmed yet. > > > > I can confirm that the bug is fixed (over 20 hours of testing should > be enough).
thanks alot! I think this thing was a long-term performance/latency regression in HT scheduling as well.
Ingo - 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/
| |