[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1193688468.9928.30.camel@pasglop>
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 07:07:48 +1100
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tony@...eyournoodle.com,
paulus@...ba.org, dino@...ibm.com, tytso@...ibm.com,
dvhltc@...ibm.com, antonb@...ibm.com, rostedt@...dmis.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] hacks to allow -rt to run kernbench on POWER
On Mon, 2007-10-29 at 11:50 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> Hello!
>
> A few random patches that permit POWER to pass kernbench on -rt.
> Many of these have more focus on expediency than care for correctness,
> so might best be thought of as workarounds than as complete solutions.
> There are still issues not addressed by this patch, including:
>
> o kmem_cache_alloc() from non-preemptible context during
> bootup (xics_startup() building the irq_radix_revmap()).
>
> o unmap_vmas() freeing pages with preemption disabled.
> Might be able to address this by linking the pages together,
> then freeing them en masse after preemption has been re-enabled,
> but there is likely a better approach.
>
> Thoughts?
I see a lot of case where you add preempt_disable/enable around areas
that have the PTE lock held...
So in -rt, spin_lock doesn't disable preempt ? I'm a bit worried...
there are some strong requirements that anything within that lock is not
preempted, so zap_pte_ranges() is the obvious ones but all of them would
need to be addressed.
Ben.
-
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