[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAAq0SUms6+ZMhk4WV0bJY-zCwSBS5xHOSLMgywDEUmb_pSB1nA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2021 09:24:00 -0300
From: Wander Costa <wcosta@...hat.com>
To: paulmck@...nel.org
Cc: wander@...hat.com, Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
"open list:TORTURE-TEST MODULES" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:READ-COPY UPDATE (RCU)" <rcu@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rcutorture: Avoid soft lockup during cpu stall
On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 5:47 PM Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 09, 2021 at 02:46:02PM -0300, wander@...hat.com wrote:
> > From: Wander Lairson Costa <wander@...hat.com>
> >
> > If we use the module stall_cpu option, we may get a soft lockup warning
> > if we also don't pass the stall_cpu_block option.
> >
> > We introduce the stall_no_softlockup option to avoid a soft lockup on
> > cpu stall even if we don't use the stall_cpu_block option.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Wander Lairson Costa <wander@...hat.com>
>
> This looks plausible to me, though it would be good to hear others'
> thoughts. In the meantime, could you please forward-port this to
> the "dev" branch of the -rcu tree?
>
> https://mirrors.edge.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/paulmck/rcutodo.html
>
> Thanx, Paul
>
Thank you for the feedback. I just sent a v2 against that applies to
the aforementioned branch.
Cheers,
Wander
[snip]
Powered by blists - more mailing lists