[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1250858541.24178.15.camel@dengdd-desktop>
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 20:42:21 +0800
From: DDD <Dongdong.deng@...driver.com>
To: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] softlockup: fix problem with long kernel pauses from
kgdb
Hi Jason & Ingo,
If we apply Peter's patch which was send out just a moment ago,
I believe this issue will gone. :-)
Thanks,
Dongdong
[PATCH -rt] timer: delay waking softirqs from the jiffy tick
...
...
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
---
kernel/timer.c | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/timer.c b/kernel/timer.c
index 8137cce..96ac1b4 100644
--- a/kernel/timer.c
+++ b/kernel/timer.c
@@ -1221,10 +1221,10 @@ void update_process_times(int user_tick)
/* Note: this timer irq context must be accounted for as well. */
account_process_tick(p, user_tick);
+ scheduler_tick();
run_local_timers();
if (rcu_pending(cpu))
rcu_check_callbacks(cpu, user_tick);
- scheduler_tick();
run_posix_cpu_timers(p);
}
On Tue, 2009-08-04 at 16:59 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com> wrote:
>
> > Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > * Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> -----
> > >> From: Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com>
> > >> Subject: [PATCH] softlockup: add sched_clock_tick() to avoid kernel warning on kgdb resume
> > >>
> > >> When CONFIG_HAVE_UNSTABLE_SCHED_CLOCK is set sched_clock() gets the
> > >> time from hardware, such as from TSC. In this configuration kgdb will
> > >> report a softlock warning messages on resuming or detaching from a
> > >> debug session.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Hm, this looks quite ugly. Peter, Thomas, can you think of a
> > > cleaner solution?
> > >
> >
> > Below was a more specific test case I received from Dongdong Deng
> > which did not require kgdb. The test case is not something to
> > merge, it is just a simple module to build to demonstrate the
> > problem outside of kgdb.
> >
> > The patch I submitted might have been on the "ugly" side, but
> > there was not an obvious way to solve the problem without making
> > changes in kernel/sched*. I opted for something that was entirely
> > self contained to the softlockup code.
>
> it's not really the fault of your patch really - all these
> integrations along dynticks, scheduler time and softlockup feel a
> bit awkward. Wondering whether there's some nicer way.
>
> 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