From: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
davidlohr@hp.com, paulus@samba.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org, mingo@kernel.org
Subject: Re: Tasks stuck in futex code (in 3.14-rc6)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 21:39:33 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140319160933.GA30295@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140319154705.GB8557@laptop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
> >
> > Infact I can reproduce this if the java_constraint is either node, socket, system.
> > However I am not able to reproduce if java_constraint is set to core.
>
> What's any of that mean?
>
Using the constraint, one can specify how many jvm instances should
participate in the specjbb run.
For example on a 4 node box, I can say 2 jvms per constraint with
constraint set to node and specjbb will run with 8 instances of java.
I was running with 1 jvm per constraint. But when I set the constraint
to node/System, I keep seeing this problem. However if I set the
constraint to core (which means running more instances of java), the
problem is not seen. I kind of guess, the lesser the number of java
instances the easier it is to reproduce.
--
Thanks and Regards
Srikar Dronamraju
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: davidlohr@hp.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org,
paulus@samba.org
Subject: Re: Tasks stuck in futex code (in 3.14-rc6)
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 21:39:33 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140319160933.GA30295@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140319154705.GB8557@laptop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
> >
> > Infact I can reproduce this if the java_constraint is either node, socket, system.
> > However I am not able to reproduce if java_constraint is set to core.
>
> What's any of that mean?
>
Using the constraint, one can specify how many jvm instances should
participate in the specjbb run.
For example on a 4 node box, I can say 2 jvms per constraint with
constraint set to node and specjbb will run with 8 instances of java.
I was running with 1 jvm per constraint. But when I set the constraint
to node/System, I keep seeing this problem. However if I set the
constraint to core (which means running more instances of java), the
problem is not seen. I kind of guess, the lesser the number of java
instances the easier it is to reproduce.
--
Thanks and Regards
Srikar Dronamraju
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-03-19 16:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-03-19 15:26 Tasks stuck in futex code (in 3.14-rc6) Srikar Dronamraju
2014-03-19 15:26 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2014-03-19 15:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-03-19 15:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-03-19 16:09 ` Srikar Dronamraju [this message]
2014-03-19 16:09 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2014-03-19 17:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-03-19 17:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-03-19 18:06 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-03-19 18:06 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-03-20 5:33 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2014-03-20 5:33 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2014-03-20 5:56 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-03-20 5:56 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-03-20 10:08 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2014-03-20 10:08 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2014-03-20 15:06 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-03-20 15:06 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-03-20 16:31 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-03-20 16:31 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-03-20 20:23 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-03-20 20:23 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-03-20 16:41 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-03-20 16:41 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-03-20 17:18 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-03-20 17:18 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-03-20 17:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-03-20 17:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-03-20 18:03 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-03-20 18:03 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-03-20 18:16 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-03-20 18:16 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-03-20 18:36 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-03-20 18:36 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-03-20 19:08 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-03-20 19:08 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-03-20 19:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-03-20 19:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-03-20 20:20 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-03-20 20:20 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-03-20 20:36 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-03-20 20:36 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-03-21 4:55 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2014-03-21 4:55 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2014-03-21 5:24 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-03-21 5:24 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-03-22 2:27 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2014-03-22 2:27 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2014-03-22 3:36 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-03-22 3:36 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-03-20 7:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-03-20 7:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-03-19 16:04 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-03-19 16:04 ` Linus Torvalds
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140319160933.GA30295@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=davidlohr@hp.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.