[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aa4f7099-1eb9-17f8-973d-8a10a7db1d94@linux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2017 09:57:24 -0700
From: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...el.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
"Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2 v2] sched/wait: Introduce lock breaker in
wake_up_page_bit
On 08/29/2017 09:24 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 9:13 AM, Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> It is affecting not a production use, but the customer's acceptance
>> test for their systems. So I suspect it is a stress test.
>
> Can you gently poke them and ask if they might make theie stress test
> code available?
>
> Tell them that we have a fix, but right now it's delayed into 4.14
> because we have no visibility into what it is that it actually fixes,
> and whether it's all that critical or just some microbenchmark.
>
Thanks. We'll do that.
Tim
Powered by blists - more mailing lists