[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <SN1PR0201MB1870C7DFF1595905BDAE985F81150@SN1PR0201MB1870.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 14:59:59 +0000
From: Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@...disk.com>
To: Sreekanth Reddy <sreekanth.reddy@...adcom.com>,
"linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"irqbalance@...ts.infradead.org" <irqbalance@...ts.infradead.org>
CC: Kashyap Desai <kashyap.desai@...adcom.com>,
Sathya Prakash Veerichetty <sathya.prakash@...adcom.com>,
Chaitra Basappa <chaitra.basappa@...adcom.com>,
Suganath Prabu Subramani
<suganath-prabu.subramani@...adcom.com>
Subject: Re: Observing Softlockup's while running heavy IOs
On 08/17/16 22:55, Sreekanth Reddy wrote:
> Observing softlockups while running heavy IOs on 8 SSD drives
> connected behind our LSI SAS 3004 HBA.
Hello Sreekanth,
This means that more than 23s was spent before the scheduler was
invoked, probably due to a loop. Can you give the attached (untested)
patch a try to see whether it is the loop in __blk_mq_run_hw_queue()?
Thanks,
Bart.
View attachment "0001-block-Measure-__blk_mq_run_hw_queue-execution-time.patch" of type "text/x-patch" (1132 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists