[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51376B5D.7040108@windriver.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 11:14:21 -0500
From: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
CC: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
<linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Threaded irqs + 100% CPU RT task = RCU stall
On 13-03-06 10:58 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Mar 2013, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
>> So, I guess the question is, whether we want to try and make the system
>> fail in a more meaningful way -- kind of like the rt throttling message
>> does - as it lets users know they've hit the wall? Something watching
>
> That Joe Doe should have noticed the throttler message, which came
> before the stall, shouldn't he?
Actually it isn't showing up at all -- just the RCU stall itself.
Now that you mention it, I do wonder why the throttler message
isn't tripped though...
Paul.
--
>
>> for kstat_incr_softirqs traffic perhaps? Or other options?
>
> The rcu stall detector could use the softirq counter and if it did not
> change in the stall period print: "Caused by softirq starvation" or
> something like that.
>
> Thanks,
>
> tglx
>
>
--
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