[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1346943414.18408.31.camel@twins>
Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2012 16:56:54 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, laijs@...fujitsu.com,
dipankar@...ibm.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca, josh@...htriplett.org,
niv@...ibm.com, tglx@...utronix.de, rostedt@...dmis.org,
Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu, dhowells@...hat.com,
eric.dumazet@...il.com, darren@...art.com, fweisbec@...il.com,
sbw@....edu, patches@...aro.org,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paul.mckenney@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 11/15] rcu: Avoid spurious RCU CPU stall
warnings
On Thu, 2012-08-30 at 11:56 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> If a given CPU avoids the idle loop but also avoids starting a new
> RCU grace period for a full minute, RCU can issue spurious RCU CPU
> stall warnings. This commit fixes this issue by adding a check for
> ongoing grace period to avoid these spurious stall warnings.
How would it avoid starting a new period for over a minute? fqs should
happen, right? And holding rcu_read_lock() for over a minute surely is a
bug.
--
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