From: Michael Cree <mcree@orcon.net.nz>
To: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
Cc: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Chris Zankel <chris@zankel.net>,
"3.2.x.." <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
Chen Liqin <liqin.chen@sunplusct.com>,
Lennox Wu <lennox.wu@gmail.com>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@parisc-linux.org>,
Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>,
Parisc <linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Koichi Yasutake <yasutake.koichi@jp.panasonic.com>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
m68k <linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org>,
Hirokazu Takata <takata@linux-m32r.org>,
Yoshinori Sato <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>,
Mikael Starvik <starvik@axis.com>,
Jesper Nilsson <jesper.nilsson@axis.com>,
Cris <linux-cris-kernel@axis.com>,
Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>,
Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru>,
Matt Turner <mattst88@gmail.com>, alpha <linux-alpha@vger.>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/11] rcu: Add missing RCU idle APIs on idle loop v2
Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2012 14:10:17 +1200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50383409.7090207@orcon.net.nz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1345857554.4840.43.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk>
On 25/08/12 13:19, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-08-24 at 14:26 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 04:58:24PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Changes since v1:
>>>
>>> - Fixed preempt handling in alpha idle loop
>>> - added ack from Geert
>>> - fixed stable email address, sorry :-/
>>>
>>> This time I built tested everywhere but: h8300 (compiler internal error),
>>> and mn10300, parisc, score (cross compilers not available in
>>> ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/tools/crosstool/files/bin/x86_64/4.6.3/)
>>>
>>> For testing, you can pull from:
>>>
>>> git://github.com/fweisbec/linux-dynticks.git
>>> rcu/idle-fix-v2
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>
>> I have queued these on -rcu branch rcu/idle:
>>
>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/paulmck/linux-rcu.git
>>
>> This problem has been in place since 3.3, so it is hard to argue that
>> it is a regression for this merge window. I have therefore queued it
>> for 3.7.
>
> I don't follow that; I would expect any serious bug fix (serious enough
> for a stable update) to be acceptable for 3.6 at this point.
>
> If the regression occurred in 3.3, then the cc lines should be something
> like:
>
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3+
>
> and not the current:
>
> Cc: 3.2.x.. <stable@vger.kernel.org>
The Alpha patches fix an even earlier regression resulting in RCU CPU
stalls on an SMP kernel built for generic Alpha (which includes the
current Debian 3.2-alpha-smp kernel) and renders the kernel pretty much
unuseable. I've only tested the two alpha patches together but maybe
just the first patch (1/11 alpha: Fix preemption handling in idle loop)
might be needed to fix the problem in 3.2. I'll test and let you know.
Cheers
Michael.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michael Cree <mcree@orcon.net.nz>
To: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
Cc: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Chris Zankel <chris@zankel.net>,
"3.2.x.." <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
Chen Liqin <liqin.chen@sunplusct.com>,
Lennox Wu <lennox.wu@gmail.com>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@parisc-linux.org>,
Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>,
Parisc <linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Koichi Yasutake <yasutake.koichi@jp.panasonic.com>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
m68k <linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org>,
Hirokazu Takata <takata@linux-m32r.org>,
Yoshinori Sato <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>,
Mikael Starvik <starvik@axis.com>,
Jesper Nilsson <jesper.nilsson@axis.com>,
Cris <linux-cris-kernel@axis.com>,
Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>,
Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru>,
Matt Turner <mattst88@gmail.com>, alpha <linux-alpha@vger.
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/11] rcu: Add missing RCU idle APIs on idle loop v2
Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2012 14:10:17 +1200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50383409.7090207@orcon.net.nz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1345857554.4840.43.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk>
On 25/08/12 13:19, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-08-24 at 14:26 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 04:58:24PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Changes since v1:
>>>
>>> - Fixed preempt handling in alpha idle loop
>>> - added ack from Geert
>>> - fixed stable email address, sorry :-/
>>>
>>> This time I built tested everywhere but: h8300 (compiler internal error),
>>> and mn10300, parisc, score (cross compilers not available in
>>> ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/tools/crosstool/files/bin/x86_64/4.6.3/)
>>>
>>> For testing, you can pull from:
>>>
>>> git://github.com/fweisbec/linux-dynticks.git
>>> rcu/idle-fix-v2
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>
>> I have queued these on -rcu branch rcu/idle:
>>
>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/paulmck/linux-rcu.git
>>
>> This problem has been in place since 3.3, so it is hard to argue that
>> it is a regression for this merge window. I have therefore queued it
>> for 3.7.
>
> I don't follow that; I would expect any serious bug fix (serious enough
> for a stable update) to be acceptable for 3.6 at this point.
>
> If the regression occurred in 3.3, then the cc lines should be something
> like:
>
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3+
>
> and not the current:
>
> Cc: 3.2.x.. <stable@vger.kernel.org>
The Alpha patches fix an even earlier regression resulting in RCU CPU
stalls on an SMP kernel built for generic Alpha (which includes the
current Debian 3.2-alpha-smp kernel) and renders the kernel pretty much
unuseable. I've only tested the two alpha patches together but maybe
just the first patch (1/11 alpha: Fix preemption handling in idle loop)
might be needed to fix the problem in 3.2. I'll test and let you know.
Cheers
Michael.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michael Cree <mcree@orcon.net.nz>
To: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
Cc: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Chris Zankel <chris@zankel.net>,
"3.2.x.." <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
Chen Liqin <liqin.chen@sunplusct.com>,
Lennox Wu <lennox.wu@gmail.com>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@parisc-linux.org>,
Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>,
Parisc <linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Koichi Yasutake <yasutake.koichi@jp.panasonic.com>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
m68k <linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org>,
Hirokazu Takata <takata@linux-m32r.org>,
Yoshinori Sato <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>,
Mikael Starvik <starvik@axis.com>,
Jesper Nilsson <jesper.nilsson@axis.com>,
Cris <linux-cris-kernel@axis.com>,
Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>,
Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru>,
Matt Turner <mattst88@gmail.com>,
alpha <linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/11] rcu: Add missing RCU idle APIs on idle loop v2
Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2012 14:10:17 +1200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50383409.7090207@orcon.net.nz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1345857554.4840.43.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk>
On 25/08/12 13:19, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-08-24 at 14:26 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 04:58:24PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Changes since v1:
>>>
>>> - Fixed preempt handling in alpha idle loop
>>> - added ack from Geert
>>> - fixed stable email address, sorry :-/
>>>
>>> This time I built tested everywhere but: h8300 (compiler internal error),
>>> and mn10300, parisc, score (cross compilers not available in
>>> ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/tools/crosstool/files/bin/x86_64/4.6.3/)
>>>
>>> For testing, you can pull from:
>>>
>>> git://github.com/fweisbec/linux-dynticks.git
>>> rcu/idle-fix-v2
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>
>> I have queued these on -rcu branch rcu/idle:
>>
>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/paulmck/linux-rcu.git
>>
>> This problem has been in place since 3.3, so it is hard to argue that
>> it is a regression for this merge window. I have therefore queued it
>> for 3.7.
>
> I don't follow that; I would expect any serious bug fix (serious enough
> for a stable update) to be acceptable for 3.6 at this point.
>
> If the regression occurred in 3.3, then the cc lines should be something
> like:
>
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 3.3+
>
> and not the current:
>
> Cc: 3.2.x.. <stable@vger.kernel.org>
The Alpha patches fix an even earlier regression resulting in RCU CPU
stalls on an SMP kernel built for generic Alpha (which includes the
current Debian 3.2-alpha-smp kernel) and renders the kernel pretty much
unuseable. I've only tested the two alpha patches together but maybe
just the first patch (1/11 alpha: Fix preemption handling in idle loop)
might be needed to fix the problem in 3.2. I'll test and let you know.
Cheers
Michael.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-25 2:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 66+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-08-23 14:58 [PATCH 00/11] rcu: Add missing RCU idle APIs on idle loop v2 Frederic Weisbecker
2012-08-23 14:58 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-08-23 14:58 ` [PATCH 01/11] alpha: Fix preemption handling in idle loop Frederic Weisbecker
2012-08-23 14:58 ` [PATCH 02/11] alpha: Add missing RCU idle APIs on " Frederic Weisbecker
2012-08-23 14:58 ` [PATCH 03/11] cris: " Frederic Weisbecker
2012-08-23 14:58 ` [PATCH 04/11] frv: " Frederic Weisbecker
2012-08-23 14:58 ` [PATCH 05/11] h8300: " Frederic Weisbecker
2012-08-23 14:58 ` [PATCH 06/11] m32r: " Frederic Weisbecker
2012-08-23 14:58 ` [PATCH 07/11] m68k: " Frederic Weisbecker
2012-08-23 14:58 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-08-23 14:58 ` [PATCH 08/11] mn10300: " Frederic Weisbecker
2012-08-23 14:58 ` [PATCH 09/11] parisc: " Frederic Weisbecker
2012-08-23 14:58 ` [PATCH 10/11] score: " Frederic Weisbecker
2012-08-23 14:58 ` [PATCH 11/11] xtensa: " Frederic Weisbecker
2012-08-24 21:26 ` [PATCH 00/11] rcu: Add missing RCU idle APIs on idle loop v2 Paul E. McKenney
2012-08-24 21:26 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-08-25 1:19 ` Ben Hutchings
2012-08-25 1:19 ` Ben Hutchings
2012-08-25 1:19 ` Ben Hutchings
2012-08-25 1:19 ` Ben Hutchings
2012-08-25 2:10 ` Michael Cree
2012-08-25 2:10 ` Michael Cree [this message]
2012-08-25 2:10 ` Michael Cree
2012-08-25 2:10 ` Michael Cree
2012-08-25 3:50 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-08-25 3:50 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-08-25 3:50 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-08-25 13:16 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-08-25 13:16 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-08-25 13:16 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-08-25 16:18 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-08-25 16:18 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-08-25 16:18 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-08-25 21:15 ` Michael Cree
2012-08-25 21:15 ` Michael Cree
2012-08-25 21:15 ` Michael Cree
2012-08-25 21:15 ` Michael Cree
2012-08-26 0:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-08-26 0:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-08-26 0:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-08-26 9:21 ` Tobias Klausmann
2012-08-26 9:21 ` Tobias Klausmann
2012-08-26 9:21 ` Tobias Klausmann
2012-08-26 9:21 ` Tobias Klausmann
2012-09-10 21:53 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-09-10 21:53 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-09-10 21:53 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-09-10 21:53 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-09-12 18:01 ` Tobias Klausmann
2012-08-26 0:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-08-25 16:18 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-08-25 13:16 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-08-25 3:50 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-09-10 21:56 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-09-10 21:56 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-09-10 21:56 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-09-10 21:56 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-09-10 22:58 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-09-10 22:58 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-09-10 22:58 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-09-10 22:58 ` Paul E. McKenney
2012-09-11 12:35 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-09-11 12:35 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-09-11 12:35 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2012-09-11 12:35 ` Frederic Weisbecker
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2012-08-23 14:58 Frederic Weisbecker
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=50383409.7090207@orcon.net.nz \
--to=mcree@orcon.net.nz \
--cc=ben@decadent.org.uk \
--cc=chris@zankel.net \
--cc=deller@gmx.de \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru \
--cc=jejb@parisc-linux.org \
--cc=jesper.nilsson@axis.com \
--cc=lennox.wu@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-alpha@vger. \
--cc=linux-cris-kernel@axis.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org \
--cc=linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=liqin.chen@sunplusct.com \
--cc=mattst88@gmail.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=rth@twiddle.net \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=starvik@axis.com \
--cc=takata@linux-m32r.org \
--cc=yasutake.koichi@jp.panasonic.com \
--cc=ysato@users.sourceforge.jp \
/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.