[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080409130757.GA11650@deepthought>
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2008 14:07:57 +0100
From: Ken Moffat <zarniwhoop@...world.com>
To: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ibm.com>, skumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: Regression in gdm-2.18 since 2.6.24
On Tue, Apr 08, 2008 at 02:20:27PM +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 07, 2008 at 12:48:33AM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
> > Well, I found your analysis convincing. Unfortunately, my hardware
> > disagreed. Testing -rc8 with CONFIG_GROUP_SCHED disabled (a test is
> > a mixture of 5 attempts to restart and 5 to shutdown):
> >
> > 1. the base version success is 4/10
> >
> > 2. increasing the granularity by a factor of 10 as you requested,
> > success is 8/10
>
> This makes me think that we are just exposing a timing related problem
> in gdm here.
>
> How abt a larger factor?
>
> # echo 200000000 > /proc/sys/kernel/sched_wakeup_granularity_ns
>
> Does that make it 10/10 ?!
>
[ snipping the suggestion to run strace, I've already sent the
results off-list ]
Yes, it does. Seems to run adequately too (a little audio playback,
a little you-tube, some untarring and compiling). Understanding the
real problem would be nice, but for me this seems to be an adequate
work-around. This is with CONFIG_GROUP_SCHED turned off.
Thanks
Ken
--
das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce
--
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