[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070603081417.GA81@tv-sign.ru>
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2007 12:14:17 +0400
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
To: Mark Hounschell <dmarkh@....rr.com>
Cc: Mark Hounschell <markh@...pro.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: floppy.c soft lockup
On 06/02, Mark Hounschell wrote:
>
> Jun 2 16:36:11 harley kernel: ERR!! events/1 flush hang: c201dbc0
> c201dbc0 10012 10012
> Jun 2 16:36:11 harley kernel: CURR: 7974 7974 vrsx 93 26
> Jun 2 16:36:11 harley kernel: wq_barrier_func+0x0/0x8
> Jun 2 16:36:11 harley kernel: vmstat_update+0x0/0x24
> Jun 2 16:36:11 harley kernel: ----
> Jun 2 16:36:11 harley kernel: cache_reap+0x0/0xf4
As expected.
Note that ->nivcsw/->nvcsw doesn't change. There is no "spare time"
on CPU 1, "vrsx" monopolizes CPU. events/1->cache_reap() was preempted
by vrsx, it had no chance to run since then. Note that jobs == 7974
doesn't change too. I forgot to print cwq->thread->state, but it should
be TASK_RUNNING. It would not be possible to kill vrsx if cache_reap()
stalled.
I don't think this is a kernel problem, vrsx breaks flush_workqueue().
Ingo can answer authoritatively, but I think SCHED_RR/SCHED_FIFO were
not designed to be 100% cpu-bound.
That said, I think it makes sense to get rid of flush_scheduled_work()
in floppy.c.
Thanks!
Oleg.
-
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