[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201008271609.16099.ptesarik@suse.cz>
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 16:09:14 +0200
From: Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@...e.cz>
To: Hedi Berriche <hedi@....com>
Cc: linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>
Subject: Re: Serious problem with ticket spinlocks on ia64
On Friday 27 of August 2010 15:48:02 Hedi Berriche wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 14:38 Petr Tesarik wrote:
> | Hi everybody,
> |
> | SGI has recently experienced failures with the new ticket spinlock
> | implementation. Hedi Berriche sent me a simple test case that can
> | trigger the failure on the siglock.
>
> One more fact, the problem was introduced by commit
>
> commit 9d40ee200a527ce08ab8c793ba8ae3e242edbb0e
> Author: Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>
> Date: Wed Oct 7 10:54:19 2009 -0700
>
> [IA64] Squeeze ticket locks back into 4 bytes.
>
> Reverting the patch makes the problem go away.
>
> IOW, and as far as testing shows, the first incarnation of the ticket locks
> implementation on IA64 (commit 2c8696), the one that used 8 bytes, does not
> exhibit this problem.
I wouldn't be so sure about it. Given that I have only observed the problem
when the spinlock value wraps around, then an 8-byte spinlock might only need
much more time to trigger the bug.
Just my two cents,
Petr Tesarik
L3 International
Novell, Inc.
--
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