[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200807111412.00084.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 14:11:59 +1000
From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Natalie Protasevich <protasnb@...il.com>,
Kernel Testers List <kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: 2.6.26-rc9-git4: Reported regressions from 2.6.25
On Friday 11 July 2008 04:06, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> i'm wondering why rcutorture didnt trigger it. I do run !HOTPLUG +
> RCU_PREEMPT kernels and never saw this. Nor did Paul. That aspect is
> weird.
It basically requires an active rcu reader to be preempted (preferably
by something doing a lot of call_rcu or other activity ie. the writer
so it can tick along the different states quickly).
I found just 2 threads (reader and writer) bound to the same CPU would
trigger it fastest, my reader has quite a long rcu read section.
I'm not sure why rcutorture doesn't trigger for everyone. I'm surprised
it does not have much longer maximum read delays -- several ms I would
have thought should be useful to have a crticial section open while the
rcu engine can run through a number of states...
--
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