From: Robert Love <rml@tech9.net>
To: Dave Jones <davej@codemonkey.org.uk>
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: yet another update to the post-halloween doc.
Date: 06 Nov 2002 11:18:01 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1036599481.3405.1080.camel@phantasy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20021106140844.GA5463@suse.de>
On Wed, 2002-11-06 at 09:08, Dave Jones wrote:
Hey Dave, good job!
One idea: how about covering new system calls? We have the thread calls
Ingo did, the sched_[set|get]affinity calls, AIO, etc.
Couple points...
> Kernel preemption.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> - The much talked about preemption patches made it into 2.5.
> With this included you should notice much lower latencies especially
> in demanding multimedia applications.
> - Note, there are still cases where preemption must be temporarily disabled
> where we do not. If you get "xxx exited with preempt count=n" messages
> in syslog, don't panic, these are non fatal, but are somewhat unclean.
> - Report such cases (and any other preemption related problems) to
> rml@tech9.net
I just want to clarify that, in the second point, the "xxx exited with
preempt_count=n" message and not disabling preemption are two different
issues.
The "xxx exited" message is a general debugging notice that a lock was
not dropped. Relevant to the whole system (regardless of preemption,
possibly) but a real problem for preemption because the lock count is
off.
Not disabling preemption where needed is like an SMP race condition.
There may be a some per-CPU data left that needs explicit protection but
hopefully not much.
Finally, if you DO notice high latency with kernel preemption enabled in
a specific code path, please report that to Andrew Morton
<akpm@digeo.com> and myself <rml@tech9.net>. We consider those bugs.
The report should be something like "the latency in my xyz application
hits xxx ms when I do foo but is normally yyy" where foo is an action
like "unlink a huge directory tree".
> procps
> ~~~~~~
> - The 2.5 /proc filesystems changed some statistics, which confuse
> older versions of procps. Rik van Riel and Robert Love have
> been maintaining a version of procps during the 2.5 cycle which
> tracks changes to /proc which you can find at http://tech9.net/rml/procps/
> - Alternatively, the original procps by Albert Cahalan now supports
> the altered formats since v3.0.5, but lags behind the bleeding edge
> version maintained by Rik and Robert. -- http://procps.sf.net/
> - The /proc/meminfo format changed slightly which also broke
> gtop in strange ways.
Just a note that the tree Rik and I are hacking on is the original and
not a fork. It is the same tree mkj created and is in the official Red
Hat CVS repository. It just has not had much activity lately and now it
has new blood :)
Albert's tree is a fork.
If you are using the official procps package, I think you need at least
2.0.8 or so - but the latest version is ideal, which is 2.0.10.
> Debugging options.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> During the stabilising period, it's likely that the debugging options
> in the kernel hacking menu will trigger quite a few problems.
> Please report any of these problems to linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> rather than just disabling the relevant CONFIG_ options.
>
> Merging of kksymoops means that the kernel will now spit out
> automatically decoded oopses (no more feeding them to ksymoops).
> For this reason, you should always enable the option in the
> kernel hacking menu labelled "Load all symbols for debugging/kksymoops".
Please please please test with CONFIG_PREEMPT, CONFIG_DEBUG, and
CONFIG_KKALLSYMS enabled. Kernel preemption gives us the ability to do
a whole slew of debugging checks like sleeping with locks held,
scheduling while atomic, exiting with locks held, etc. etc.
> Need checking.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> - Someone reported evolution locks up when calender/tasks/contacts is selected.
> http://lists.ximian.com/archives/public/evolution-hackers/2002-March/004292.html
> reports this as an evolution/ORBit problem. Did it get fixed ?
Not yet. I have talked to the Evolution/ORBit guys about this -
especially Elliot Lee.
It is an ORBit problem and is currently not fixed as of the latest
release. The problem is 2.4, actually, which has bad behavior with
getpeername() - it does not fill in the sun_path member. ORBit works
around this behavior, which breaks 2.5 which does fill in the value.
A quick fix is to just have ORBit set sun_path to null after calling
getpeername().
Robert Love
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-11-06 16:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-11-06 14:08 yet another update to the post-halloween doc Dave Jones
2002-11-06 14:37 ` Jaroslav Kysela
2002-11-06 15:02 ` Dave Jones
2002-11-06 16:11 ` Adam Belay
2002-11-07 2:28 ` bill davidsen
2002-11-06 14:44 ` Miles Bader
2002-11-06 17:29 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2002-11-06 15:18 ` Martin Josefsson
2002-11-06 15:23 ` Alan Cox
2002-11-06 16:18 ` Robert Love [this message]
2002-11-06 16:53 ` Dave Jones
2002-11-06 21:56 ` Robert Love
2002-11-07 16:33 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-11-07 18:18 ` Robert Love
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=1036599481.3405.1080.camel@phantasy \
--to=rml@tech9.net \
--cc=davej@codemonkey.org.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox