From: Dmitry Ilvokhin <d@ilvokhin.com>
To: Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
Cc: paulmck@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
kernel-team@meta.com, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] locking/csd-lock: Report how long a stuck CSD lock took to recover
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 10:57:21 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <anW6EcABJdRFbvu7@shell.ilvokhin.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260805-csd-stall-duration-v1-1-71134fafe150@debian.org>
On Wed, Aug 05, 2026 at 05:51:54AM -0700, Breno Leitao wrote:
> /*
> * Complain if too much time spent waiting. Note that only
> * the CSD_TYPE_SYNC/ASYNC types provide the destination CPU,
> * so waiting on other types gets much less information.
> */
> -static bool csd_lock_wait_toolong(call_single_data_t *csd, u64 ts0, u64 *ts1, int *bug_id, unsigned long *nmessages)
> +static bool csd_lock_wait_toolong(call_single_data_t *csd, u64 ts0, u64 *ts1, u64 *ts_resend,
> + int *bug_id, unsigned long *nmessages)
nit: csd_lock_wait_toolong() has too many arguments now to my liking.
This was already a bit awkward before, maybe it is time for a small
clean up. Does it make sense to pack timestamps, bug_id and nmessages
into a struct and pass it around instead?
That could go in as a separate cleanup ahead of this one.
Other than that, it looks reasonable to me.
With or without that:
Reviewed-by: Dmitry Ilvokhin <d@ilvokhin.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-07 10:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-05 12:51 [PATCH] locking/csd-lock: Report how long a stuck CSD lock took to recover Breno Leitao
2026-08-07 10:57 ` Dmitry Ilvokhin [this message]
2026-08-07 13:16 ` Breno Leitao
2026-08-07 23:14 ` Paul E. McKenney
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=anW6EcABJdRFbvu7@shell.ilvokhin.com \
--to=d@ilvokhin.com \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=leitao@debian.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@kernel.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.