| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20070112132550.dc007698.akpm@osdl.org> Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 13:25:50 -0800 From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org> To: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com> Cc: Ravikiran G Thirumalai <kiran@...lex86.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>, "Shai Fultheim (Shai@...lex86.org)" <shai@...lex86.org>, pravin b shelar <pravin.shelar@...softinc.com> Subject: Re: High lock spin time for zone->lru_lock under extreme conditions On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 11:46:22 -0800 (PST) Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com> wrote: > > While the softlockups and the like went away by enabling interrupts during > > spinning, as mentioned in http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/1/3/29 , > > Andi thought maybe this is exposing a problem with zone->lru_locks and > > hence warrants a discussion on lkml, hence this post. Are there any > > plans/patches/ideas to address the spin time under such extreme conditions? > > Could this be a hardware problem? Some issue with atomic ops in the > Sun hardware? I'd assume so. We don't hold lru_lock for 33 seconds ;) Probably similar symptoms are demonstrable using other locks, if a suitable workload is chosen. Increasing PAGEVEC_SIZE might help. But we do allocate those things on the stack. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists