[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1419002069.13012.4@mail.thefacebook.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 10:14:29 -0500
From: Chris Mason <clm@...com>
To: Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
CC: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Dâniel Fraga <fragabr@...il.com>,
Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Suresh Siddha <sbsiddha@...il.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Peter Anvin <hpa@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: frequent lockups in 3.18rc4
On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 9:55 AM, Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 08:48:24PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 8:03 PM, Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > So the only thing that was on that could cause spinlock overhead
> > > was DEBUG_SPINLOCK (and LOCK_STAT, though iirc that's not huge
> either)
> >
> > So DEBUG_SPINLOCK does have one big downside if I recall correctly
> -
> > the debugging spinlocks are very much not fair. So they don't work
> > like the real ticket spinlocks. That might have serious effects on
> the
> > contention case, with some thread not making any progress due to
> just
> > the implementation of the debug spinlocks.
>
> Wish DEBUG_SPINLOCK disabled, I see the same behaviour.
> Lots of traces spewed, but it seems to run and run (at least so far).
Not quite the same, the spinlocks are gone.
-chris
--
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