[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090116223202.GC3899@elte.hu>
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 23:32:02 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Mike Travis <travis@....com>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PULL}: latest tip/cpus4096 changes
* Mike Travis <travis@....com> wrote:
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Mike Travis <travis@....com> wrote:
> >
> >> commit b758cdbee5da0b8fb7e34a68651e6ccc5310b48a
> >> Author: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
> >> Date: Thu Jan 15 16:29:16 2009 -0800
> >>
> >> work_on_cpu: Use our own workqueue.
> >>
> >> Impact: remove potential circular lock dependency with generic kevent workqueue
> >>
> >> Annoyingly, some places we want to use work_on_cpu are already in
> >> workqueues. As per Ingo's suggestion, we create a different workqueue
> >> for work_on_cpu.
> >
> > btw., that's a nice fix - were you able to reproduce any of the lockdep
> > asserts that i got in testing, and did those go away with this patch?
> >
> > If yes then that's nice and makes work_on_cpu() a lot more usable IMO.
> >
> > If not then that should generally be declared in the pull request:
> > "beware, different approach than before but might still trigger lockdep
> > warnings"
> >
> > Ingo
>
> Hi,
>
> I've been trying all sorts of overlapping testing and I've not gotten the
> lockdep warnings any more. (I do occasionally get that debug object warning
> that I mentioned to Thomas, though that comes and goes irregardless of any
> patches.) [...]
That hpet warning is fixed in tip/timers/urgent [which you wont have if
you try pure tip/cpus4096].
> [...] The two fixes that Rusty did (lose the get_online_cpus() and use
> a separate work queue) seems to have relieved work_on_cpu of it's
> primary problems, and I've not found any new ones to replace them yet.
> ;-)
>
> So I'll "un-push" the entire patchset, and then re-push the x86 only
> ones, and send the others to their respective maintainers after fixing
> the problems you mentioned. (Posting patches to the list was way more
> fun, and less "committable". ;-)
Sounds good.
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