[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081218111612.GD14332@elte.hu>
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 12:16:12 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] tracing/function-graph-tracer: prevent from hrtimer
interrupt infinite loop
* Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com> wrote:
> 2008/12/18 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>:
> >
> > * Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Impact: fix a system hang on slow systems
> >>
> >> While testing the function graph tracer on VirtualBox, I had a system hang
> >> immediatly after enabling the tracer.
> >>
> >> If hrtimer is enabled on kernel, a slow system can spend too much time
> >> during tracing the hrtimer_interrupt which will do eternal loops,
> >> assuming it always have to retry its process because too much time
> >> elapsed during its time update. Now we provide a feature which lurks at
> >> the number of retries on hrtimer_interrupt. After 10 retries, the
> >> function graph tracer will definetly stop its tracing.
> >
> > hm, i dont really like this solution - it just works around the problem by
> > 'speeding up' the system. If we have a _real_ slow system, there's no such
> > way for us to speed it up.
>
>
> It doesn' speed up the system actually. That's not the goal of this
> patch.
i meant that abstractly. The "solution" here is that your patch turns off
the function-graph-tracer. The practical effect of that is: the system
gets much faster at processing hrtimer IRQs and effectively "speeds up".
ok?
Ingo
--
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