lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Jan]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] rcu: Eliminate softirq processing from rcutree
From
Date
On Fri, 2014-01-17 at 18:14 +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: 
> * Mike Galbraith | 2013-12-25 18:37:37 [+0100]:
>
> >On Tue, 2013-12-24 at 23:55 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >> On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 04:07:34AM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> >
> >Having sufficiently recovered from turkey overdose to be able to slither
> >upstairs (bump bump bump) to check on the box, commenting..
> >
> ># timers-do-not-raise-softirq-unconditionally.patch
> ># rtmutex-use-a-trylock-for-waiter-lock-in-trylock.patch
> >
> >..those two out does seem to have stabilized the thing.
>
> timers-do-not-raise-softirq-unconditionally.patch is on its way out.
>
> rtmutex-use-a-trylock-for-waiter-lock-in-trylock.patch confues me.
> Didn't you report once that your box deadlocks without this patch? Now
> your 64way box on the other hand does not work with it?

If 'do not raise' is applied, 'use a trylock' won't save you. If 'do
not raise' is not applied, _and_ you wisely do not try to turn on very
expensive nohz_full, things work fine without 'use a trylock'.

-Mike



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-01-18 04:41    [W:0.072 / U:1.016 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site